Bila katak pisang panggil hujan...

Ular datang menjamu selera.

***

Source - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2005/12/25/nation/12960570&sec=nation

Bill ignites battle of the sexes

ANALYSIS BY SUHAINI AZNAM

A MINOR crisis occurred in the normally staid Dewan Negara last week. The 19 women senators were lined up against a contentious Islamic Bill, which having been unanimously passed under protest, eroded their rights while enhancing the men’s.

On the eve of the debate, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz invoked the whip, compelling the women senators to toe the party line. They did. Each said that despite her conscience, “I am a loyal party member and will obey.”

Had the Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories) (Amendment) Bill 2005 not gone through, Nazri admitted “it would have meant trouble for me.”

The women senators tried to present rational speeches, with facts and logic. Some succeeded, others failed.
Datuk Dayang Mahani Tun Pengiran Ahmad Raffae was practically in tears as she led the debate, lending credence to men's stereotyping of women as emotional beings.
Curiously, none of the PAS women senators who had joined their Barisan Nasional counterparts in opposing the amendments turned up for the debate and vote. So the Bill was passed unanimously.

The Cabinet had delegated the job of formulating the Bill to Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department in charge of religious affairs Datuk Abdullah Mohd Zin, who received input from the Islamic Development Department (Jakim) and other Muslim bodies.

The women had expected Abdullah to polish his guns in winding up the debate. Instead, he gave them the same briefing he had two days earlier, which led them to submit a letter asking him to withdraw the amendments.

The 12 women senators present easily shot down his arguments.
Abdullah said, “Giving fasakh to the men is deemed fair. Otherwise, the men will say everything is for women, what about us?” (Fasakh is a privilege traditionally given to women to claim divorce in case their husbands failed in their obligations.)

Datuk Dr Norraesah Mohamed rebutted by saying if that was the case, the men should take fasakh and give women the men’s power of talaq (absolute divorce) instead.

Abdullah also said the words dan and atau had perhaps evolved in meaning.

Datuk Azizah Abdul Samad promptly responded with “If the Yang di-Pertua wanted to marry Norraesah or me, then it means he wants to marry one of us. If he wants to marry Norraesah and me, then he wants to marry both of us. Is it so difficult to understand the meaning?” which drew laughter from the House.

The male senators too had their say.

Datuk Rizuan Abdul Hamid, a self-admitted “good practitioner of polygamy,” said, “This amendment benefits women more because the conditions for polygamy are very tight. If you want to marry a second wife, you must call the first (to the Syariah court).

“You must also call the prospective wife. I don’t know why. Won’t you feel embarrassed? And once they are outside the courtroom, the battle begins.”

Datuk Abdul Rashid Ngah asked: “With three women ministers in the Cabinet, could they not have voiced their objections?”

In their defence, Nazri replied that at a Cabinet meeting on Aug 17, the women had actually said that they had problems with the Bill.

“So it is not true that the women ministers are not playing their roles,” he said.

Throughout the four-hour debate, Dewan Negara president Tan Sri Dr Abdul Hamid Pawanteh calmly allowed the women to vent their frustrations even as he adhered strictly to the clock.

The Bill was slated as the last item that Thursday, the last day before the House adjourned.
The drama also threw the spotlight on the relationship between the executive and legislature.
In what capacity had Nazri invoked the whip?

He said that while Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak was the whip in Dewan Rakyat, Works Minister Datuk Seri Samy Vellu and he (Nazri) could also serve as whips.

“We are all whips,” he said.

As minister in charge of parliamentary affairs, he was expected to bring the business of the executive to the legislature. But in dictating the vote on a non-national security issue, was it not a blurring of the fine line between the executive and legislature?

***

More at - Mak Andeh, Kak Teh