Civil Society in Malaysia and Thailand - Essay Example

Introduction Most political scientists have always deemed the strength or presence of a democracy by the presence and vibrancy of the civil society. This notion not only applies to mature democracies, but also to the ASEAN countries such as Malaysia and Thailand. Considered mostly as the third sector of the society, the civil society is not only distinct from the corporate sector and the public service, but is also the aggregate of non-governmental institutions and organizations which runs independent of the government. The salient nature of the civil society is exemplified when the Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak announced that the Malaysian government was finally going to repeal the draconian Internal Security Act (ISA), some time in 2013, since the civil society in Malaysia had been agitating for this. It is for this reason that the cause of the civil society is seen as indispensible in reference to Malaysia and Thailand, as shall be seen in the ensuing discussion. Thesis statement Although the significance of the civil society spans socioeconomic and political values, yet the presence and success of civil society activism is totally predicated upon the prevailing political environment, as shall be seen in the case of Malaysia and Thailand. Evaluating the effectiveness of civil society in Southeast Asia The case of the civil society in Southeast Asia has been seen to be relatively successful, as far as both Thailand and Malaysia are concerned. This is particularly the case with the democratization of politics. In Thailand, the implementation of the new constitution in 1997 paved way for more robust participation in the Thailand politics by the civil society. It is for this reason that since 1997, the country has witnessed a steady rise in the recognition of civil liberties and freedoms such as freedom of speech, press and association (Liow, 178). In Malaysia, the presence and activity of the civil society has also been vibrant, but as late as 2008. One of the testaments to the success of the civil society in Malaysia is the rising level of public awareness and participation on governance, following the country’s 12th elections which were held on March 2008. This development can be considered a success since one of the roles of the civil society is conscientizing the people on the need to participate in political processes. BERSIH 2.0, BERSIH 3.0 and Himpunan Hijau are some of the proofs that underscore the success and vibrant initiatives of the civil society in Malaysia. These incidents are significant since they show that the Malaysians are departing from politically retrogressive ideas such as tidak apa and tidak tahu. Where and when civil society has been most effective, least effective and how the differences can be account for The differences in the degree of effectiveness of the civil society can be said to be occasioned by political developments which have been state-specific. In particular, the fruits attributable to the civil society in Thailand cannot be expected to be as ripe as those of mature democracies since it is only as recent as 1973 when Thailand instituted reforms as a way of inculcating accountability, transparency and good governance. The place of the civil society’s effectiveness rests also on the goodwill that Thailand’s political leaders possess. Specifically, Thailand’s civil society has since 2001 enjoyed the support of the former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra. Shinawatra protected and supported the role played by the civil society, arguing that the creation of a more collective system of governance which is more accountable, transparent, and responsive was inseparable from the realization of a more democratic dispensation. In the case of Malaysia, the relative success of the civil society is underpinned by Mahathir’s islamisation programme. This programme included the institutionalisation of religious bureaucracy under the aegis of the state, Islamic financial and banking systems, Islamic courts and all levels of Islamic education. It is against this backdrop that Mahathir Administration created certain research institutes which encouraged the elucidation, the articulation and the exposition of the Malaysian Government’s Islamisation project, through caucuses such as IKIM (Malaysian Institute of Islamic Understanding), IKD (Institute of Policy Studies) and ISTAC (Institute for Islamic Thought and Civilisation). With the strengthening of these civil society caucuses, Malaysia has experienced a rise in civil society activities. Islamisation of Malaysia (Gilsenan, 166) The case is replicated in Thailand where the civil society has spearheaded not only the participation of the Thais in economic development, but also Thailand’s economic development. Civil society caucuses in Thailand have actively involved themselves in both active and closed projects that enjoy World Bank’s and other non-banking institutions’ funding. Thus, these caucuses have been successful in abating spates of corruption since they scrutinise proposed and dropped projects and the amount that had been previously forecasted. Conversely, the success above is underscored by efforts by Ashoka (a civil society caucus) which aims at promoting social entrepreneurship and innovation among the youthful population. In the same wavelength, the civil society in Thailand has played an immense role in promoting environmental safety and conservation concerns in a country where previously, the preservation of clean air, water and land were being treated as ancillary to economic growth. Part of the civil society’s success in Thailand has its underpinnings in the political developments that took place in 2008. This is because, it is in January 2008 that Thailand voted out the military junta for a civilian government. The second factor has its reality in the enshrining of the presence of the civil society and civil liberties in Thailand’s constitution, in 1997 and 2007. These developments helped nurture a political environment in which the civil society can significantly and positively influence the government. Particularly, the Constitutional Reform of 1997 in Thailand became a watershed for the success of the civil society since it instituted increased checks and balances, devolution, legislative reforms and separation of powers and human rights. These are the very factors that provide felicity conditions for the success of the civil society. On the converse, the change of the nature of Islamic discourse that was to prevail in Malaysia by political parties therein helped affect the extent of civil society success. Previously, there had been a sharply intense rivalry over the form of Islam in the Malaysian political sphere. Unlike the previous situation whereby the UMNO-led administration roundly rejected the notion of an Islamic state, UMNO under the leadership of Mahathir appropriated PAS discourse on the same. The taking over of the mantle by UMNO and Mahathir was significant since it paved way for the rejuvenation of civil society caucuses such as IKIM, IKD and ISTAC and activism (Liow, 281). In the case of Malaysia, the civil society has mainly failed to secure civil rights and liberties in Malaysia where Islam is predominant. This is particularly in the area of dressing which is also part of an expression and is legally sanctioned. Given that dressing is legally sanctioned, there are laws that proscribe indecent dressing and lewdness, with these laws mainly falling under public indecency. However, in Malaysia, the situation is severe, given that many a time in Malaysia, patrons have been arrested for improper dressing and immoral activities, without the legal qualification of these charges being provided. The JAWI raid of 20th January 2005 exemplifies many such cases. Upon apprehension, only Sections 19, 35 and 43 of the 1997 Shariah Criminal Act are read as also the grounds to apprehend those who participate in drinking. The civil society fails in this juncture because it fails to provide demarcation between the limits of free choice and the legal limitations of such laws. Defendants are also not informed about the specific criminal offences they have committed. Because of this, there is lucidity in saying that there is a lacuna in the Malaysian constitution and the oppressive political elements are using it to repress the masses because of the ineffectiveness of the Malaysian civil society (Liow, 180). Part of the failure by the Malaysian civil society is underscored by Malaysia being predominantly Muslim. With this heavy Muslim population, Malaysia is highly concomitant with Islamic ideals and the Shariah. In this situation, it becomes easy to have civil liberties and the works of the civil society being set apart from religious laws. On the side of Thailand, the civil society appeared to make slow progress than should have been the case, since the 2007 Constitution that had been drafted, promulgated and adopted did not auger well with the activities of the civil society. Works Cited Gilsenan, Michael, Ed. Islamic Legitimacy in a Plural Asia. London: Routledge Contemporary Asia Series, 166. Print Liow, J. Chinyong. Political Islam in Malaysia, 178. Print Liow, J. Chinyong. Political Islam in Malaysia, 180. Print Liow, J. Chinyong. Political Islam in Malaysia, 281. Print Read More