Readiness of ASEAN Banking Sector Integration: Recent Development and Statistical Evidence

[Report for “MOHE/BNM Attachment Program”]

Abstract

ASEAN has a vision to form a single community by 2015. Thus, ASEAN integration has been a topic of great interest but unfortunately, attention has been over-focused on economics aspect. This paper aims to study the specific aspect of ASEAN banking sector integration within three objectives. Firstly, this paper aims to compare the ASEAN countries’ respective commitments to its own members through ASEAN Framework Agreement on Services (AFAS) against their commitments to the world under General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). Secondly, this paper aims to evaluate the readiness of ASEAN for banking sector integration using statistical approach. Thirdly, the statistical results from the second objective will be utilized to construct an indicator of readiness for ASEAN banking sector integration. The results reveal that ASEAN countries’ commitment to AFAS did not differ much from their respective commitments to GATS. Statistical evidence shows that there are vast differences in monetary conditions between ASEAN countries, hence causing difficulties for one-step-total-integration. Therefore, “paired-integration” is proposed based on the results of “readiness indicator”. Optimal pairing for Malaysia is Thailand, followed by Philippines and Singapore.

'Quo vadis' Hindraf?

Har Wai Mun | May 4, 09 3:44pm
[Source: http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/103567]

After being greatly successful in swinging the Indian vote in favour of Pakatan Rakyat since the 12th general election and for almost every subsequent by-election, Hindraf seems to have finally reached a crossroads, pondering which future path to go onto next.

Intense government suppression including the detention of their leaders and banning the movement makes Hindraf's future more uncertain. An internal rift does not help either.

Nevertheless, the biggest threat to Hindraf's future is neither the government nor its internal conflict, but the direction of their struggle in the long run. Two questions are of utmost importance to Hindraf.

Firstly, should Hindraf's continue their struggle by solely focusing on the Indian community or should encompass the multi-racial society in Malaysia?

When voters rejected Barisan Nasional's racial politics, one would ponder whether Hindraf would face the same fate in the near future. Do the voters want another MIC after they have rejected one?

Hindraf members could stress that they really care and fight for Indian community unlike the MIC. Yet truly, Malaysians could point out that there are poor and marginalised Malays and Chinese too.

Thus, how about them? Let the DAP take care of the Chinese while PAS and PKR help the Malays? I certainly hope not and thankfully do not see those abovementioned parties moving towards that direction of racial politics.

However, due to relatively more pressing problems from the Indian community, Hindraf is certainly being more practical in giving their undivided attention to the community for the moment.

But in the future, Hindraf's survival requires them to enlarge their vision and struggle for all Malaysians regardless of race to uphold the true spirit of ‘people power' as they originally popularised as ‘Makkal Sakhti'.

The second question is should Hindraf move towards attaining formal political power? On one hand, restriction to do so could limit the effectiveness of the movement to bring changes at the national level.

Thus, parliamentarians, ministers and state executive councilors are needed. On the other hand, a ‘yes' answer could possibly lead to certain individual members becoming overly politically ambitious.

By the way, bear in mind that Hindraf is officially an illegal movement, hence it is impossible for it to become a political party. Registering a new political party using new name is also equally impossible under the BN government.

So, the most workable way to gain formal political power is through existin political parties. Yet, another dilemma would be whether Hindraf parliamentarians of other party memberships could unrestrictedly represent the movement.

The answers to these questions might unlock the future direction for Hindraf. Currently, their existence seems to be more energised by emotion rather than on long-term basis practicalities.

Hindraf's ‘partnership' with Pakatan Rakyat is on a rather ‘ad hoc' basis based on the scenario that they share the same enemy (BN).

For Hindraf and Pakatan Rakyat to survive and glorify in Malaysian history, their ‘enemy' should not be BN, but poverty corruption, unfairness, restrictions on freedom (particularly the Internal Security Act), the alarming economic crisis, the declining education standard and the degradation of our environment.

Cabinet lineup a mockery of democracy

Har Wai Mun | Apr 10, 09 5:13pm
[Source: http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/102123]

Looking at the recent political developments and the new cabinet lineup, democracy in Malaysia is heading down the drain. Online encyclopedia Wikipedia defines ‘democracy’ as a form of government in which power is held indirectly by citizens in a free electoral system.

There are two principles of democracy. The first principle is that all members of society (citizens) have equal access to power.

The second is that all members (citizens) enjoy universally-recognised freedoms and liberties. Have these two principles been upheld in Malaysia?

Firstly, there are three ministers and six deputy ministers appointed not by them winning elections but through the ‘back door’. Does this imply that Barisan Nasional (BN) does not have capable members of Parliament to do the job?

Perhaps, the new prime minister sees extraordinary talent or wisdom in these senators that justify their appointment. If that is the case, as when Abdullah Badawi appointed Zaid Ibrahim, it is justifiable and should be applauded.

However, questions are raised over those who were losers and were rejected by voters in the 12th general election. Bear in mind that it should be the people that elect the government. When they are rejected by the people, why should they be in the cabinet?

This is a mockery of our electoral system. It is also a robbery of power from the people, hence violating the abovementioned first principle of democracy.

Furthermore, the failure to appoint newly-elected Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin, who is also a member of Parliament, is a mockery of the Umno elections too.

Secondly, a separate portfolio to ‘oversee national unity’ is a disgrace to the people. Does the government see Malaysians voting for Pakatan Rakyat as an act of ‘non-unity’ thus the urgent need to ‘oversee’ it so that it would not happen again?

Would it not be better to create a ‘Unity Affairs Division’ in each of the BN component parties as well to take care of their members’ ‘unity’?

Third, the appointment of Hishammuddin Hussien as Home Affairs minister is a big shock, which could backfire on BN too.

Not to belittle his ability, but given his record of supporting the draconian ISA and keris showboating, this appointment did not goes well with the second principle of democracy nor national unity.

Perhaps, this is Malaysia, the ‘Boleh-land’. Nevertheless, do not forget Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s infamous phrase of ‘work with me, not work for me’.

Despite being the most liberal and performance-oriented prime minister, his Umno mates no longer chose to work with him.

Hence, if the new prime minister and his cabinet try to practice ‘Own People First, Showboating Performance Now’, be warned that people power could still overcome whatever political suppression to restore the principles of democracy.

This for every subsequent by-election until the next general election.

We need to switch on our political consciousness

Har Wai Mun | Mar 26, 09 4:12pm

[Source: http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/101054]

Come Saturday, thousands of cities, towns and municipalities all over the world will put their lights out for one hour 8.30 am local time. The organisers believe that this switching off of lights towards natural darkness is a vote for the future of earth against global warming.

While the Earth Hour campaign is celebrated, a possible ‘political lights out’ ten days later in Malaysia may not.

After the triple by-election on April 7, ousted Perak Menteri Besar Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin as well as Pakatan Rakyat could face a political blackout. But perhaps, could it be that Umno would experience a political knockout?

Could the battle of an unstoppable Anwar Ibrahim against an immovable Barisan Nasional (BN) finally come to an end soon?

Nevertheless, the most regretted happening is the gradual, unconscious ‘lights out’ of Malaysian political consciousness. Following are three examples.

Firstly, election goodies are easy bait. Community projects like building hospitals and schools are not government efforts anymore but credited to a political party/alliance.

The most common slogan used is ‘Satu Lagi Project Barisan Nasional’. Malaysians fail to realise that these projects are part and parcel of the role of any elected government and are funded by public money.

Secondly, we are taught that giving gifts with the intention of getting some reciprocal reward (in contrast to merely showing appreciation) is akin to bribing. So are not elections goodies some form of bribe?

And how about rent-seeking as in the Approved Permits (AP) case? How about the findings outlined in the annual auditor-general’s report? What about the Lingam tape scandal?

Malaysian have easily forgotten all these cases after the BN government’s aggressive marketing of the latest anti-corruption body, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

Hence, where is the Malaysian consciousness on ethics? Have we switched off the lights on our sound judgment?

Thirdly, we protest against political crackdown in Myanmar, the invasion of Iraq and the aggression in Afghanistan, to name a few. Malaysia champions for democracy.

Then, how on earth do we justify detention without trial under the ISA? Can we justify aggression towards peaceful demonstrators? How about restriction on speech, banning of opposition party organs and curbs on religious freedom?

In the first place, it is disharmony that gives strength to protest, criticism and debate all of which are need for the process to seek a new equilibrium towards stronger unity and more lasting harmony.

Yet, BN has been successfully using their tricks to pain a negative connotation of opposition-inclined Malaysians and many duly follow this line without giving it much thought.

Hopefully, Malaysian will switch off their lights for Earth Hour but not the light of their political consciousness.

Democracy at uncharted areas: A Joke or valuable discovery?

In the 12th general election, which is dubbed as “political tsunami”, years of Barisan Nasional (BN) dominance in Malaysian politic was suddenly crashed by the opposition alliance’s people power. Ever since, democracy system in Malaysia has been exploring uncharted areas day by day.

The latest or perhaps also the most interesting is the Perak saga. Among those uncharted areas include phenomena of “jumping frog” that led to the case of two opposing Menteri Besar (MB), questioning the legitimacy of each other. The case is hence dubbed “MB vs. MB case”. Another one is today emergency sitting of Perak state assembly which held under a tree! Hence, some Pakatan supporters dubbed the tree as "pokok demokrasi" (democracy tree) (Ong 2008).

The ongoing Perak saga again and again throw fresh doubt about BN’s integrity as well as neutrality of law enforcement authority (the police, particularly). In this case, should the BN go all out to stop the state assembly? If the BN "order" the Pakatan state assemblymen to wait and settle dispute in court, why not they wait and prove their legality in the court first before declaring their are legal state government of Perak?

Anyway, the below picture may worth thousand of words on democracy in uncharted areas… but whether the happening is a worth discovery or a shameful joke is yet to know. Perhaps, time will tell.


(Source: The Malaysian Insider.com)

Reference:
Ong, Andrew. High drama, violence & 'pokok demokrasi'. Available at http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/99471. Access date: 3 March 2009.

Public perception of the police wasn't got overnight

Har Wai Mun | Feb 13, 09 1:10pm
[Source: http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/98213]

All of a sudden, issues such as race, corruption and Malaysian police brutality are making headlines. Yet, these issues did not come from nowhere or spring up overnight.

‘Malay’, ‘Chinese’ and ‘Indian’ are supposed to be a neutral adjectives to describe the origin of someone just like ‘thin’ and ‘fat’.

However, if these adjectives are institutionalised in an unfair manner over a long period of time, then it could become a big issue.

It will be interesting to imagine having a national policy that gives an advantage to overweight people but discriminate against skinny people. What will happen after one day? One year? Fifty years?

Let’s continue to imagine. After fifty years, some skinny people may not tolerate it anymore and get angry and start to criticise that policy. Should we blame them? Should we stop them? Jail them for the sake of maintaining harmony?

Applying the same analysis to a perception of the police force, their negative image did not develop overnight and out of nothing. Nevertheless, they should not be blamed completely too.

A continuous suppression of freedom of speech with the police as enforcers naturally puts them in bad faith with the public. Misusing the police force as a political tool is another factor.

In a bi-directional causality effect, these two factors in turn over-empower the police, hence providing breeding ground for misuse of power.

Nonetheless, it needs plenty of repeat cases of police mischief over a long period of time to enable a bad perception to develop. The reverse is true to change a perception from bad to good.

Therefore, the police force should wake up from its state of denial and be brave enough to confront reality. Particularly that related to the A Kugan case. They should be doing as their slogan saying: ‘Firm, Fair and Courteous’.

Please be firm in identifying and taking action against the responsible person(s) involved in Kugan’s death. Please be fair, which includes being transparent and declining any government intervention in this case.

Hence, the home minister’s outcry is not welcome; particularly his ‘Don't see criminals as heroes’ statement. I hope that the police and minister understand that nobody is a ‘criminal’ until having being found guilty by the courts.

Lastly, please show courtesy to the public whom you should protect with your integrity. Again, please realise that any ‘good’ or ‘demonic’ perception on anybody did not come from nowhere or just overnight.