My letter to Nurul Izzah

Salam Nurul Izzah,

How are you?

I am writing to you as you are my current MP in Lembah Pantai. I would be very thankful if you could spare some time for a meet to discuss a few things.

I am assuming you will be contesting in the same seat in the next elections. I have initiated a plan to ensure that only the best candidate will represent the rakyat. I am not partisan, and as such I am willing to vote the best candidate, be they from Pakatan Rakyat, Barisan Nasional or Independents.

I would like to have a contract, albeit a halal one, with the potential candidates. I have a wish list that I would like you and your opponent to look into before I make my decision on who to vote. I do not expect you to agree to every item, but the candidate who agrees and promises to do more will get my vote.

Here is my list for discussion, that you:

i. Propose the enactment of non-party hopping within six months and continue to push it forward until the law is in place. You personally will not party hop and will open and explicitly go against the acceptance of any party-hoppers into your team

ii. Speak on behalf of all Malaysians regardless of race or religion at all times and never fight only for one community

iii. Promote economic policies that provide support to all Malaysians in the bottom 40% strata of society, regardless of race

iv. Publicly declare your assets with a third party register with a legally binding statutory declaration

v. Propose to make the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) report directly to Parliament, within six months of the GE and continue to fight for it until the law is in place

vi. Call for a press conference within a month after the elections and show clear knowledge, appreciation and support that the Malay and indigenous customs form our core culture, while the Chinese,Indian and other cultures play strong supporting roles as part and parcel to form the unique Malaysia brand

vii. Practice empathy; e.g. - refuse to allow beef or pork to be served or sold in all government-related premises, projects and all party activities.

viii. Initiate a process to work towards one-stream schools which also adequately provides for all who want to learn their vernacular languages, to be established within the next fifteen years. Propose a contitutional change to make this happen within six months after elections.

ix. Ensure that at least 50% of your work schedule is allocated for working directly for the people in your constituency, you will clock in the hours and keep a monthly report of these efforts

x. Rise above party politics, and keep the above nine conditions even if it goes against your party


Please note that I will be recording a video of your pledge and I will be uploading it onto my Facebook and other social media avenues.

I will be most happy to meet you in the first two weeks of March. I can be contacted at anas@zubedy.com, www.twitter.com/anaszubedy or 03-77270758

Thank you.

Salam.

anas zubedy

The Thirteenth General Election: Great Expectations by Prof Dr Chandra Muzaffar - Yayasan 1 Malaysia

On the occasion of the 200^th birth anniversary of the celebrated English writer, Charles Dickens, one senses that many well-heeled, well-educated Malaysians harbour some “Great Expectations” about the future of the nation once the Barisan Nasional (BN) is ousted from power in the 13^th General Election. There are various dimensions to these Great Expectations.

There are Malaysians who are convinced that a Pakatan Rakyat (PR) government in Putrajaya will usher in a magnificent era of honest, competent governance. They forget that when a government is overthrown in a democracy there is no guarantee that its successor will be able to ensure the triumph of good, clean governance partly because the scope for radical, holistic change in a competitive party system with deep, vested interests is limited. The Janata Party in India, in spite of its popular crusade against corruption within the ruling Indian National Congress, failed to curb the scourge and was in power for only three years from 1977 to 1980. Similarly, the opposition coalition that replaced the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) in 1993 hardly made a dent upon the institutionalised elite corruption that has plagued Japanese politics for a long while.

The PR, it is true, has, at the state level, initiated a couple of measures that reflect good governance such as the declaration of the assets of Executive Council members and a ‘Freedom of Information Act.’ Mentri Besar Azizan Abdul Razak in Kedah and Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng in Penang are perceived by a segment of the public in the two states as men of integrity. Nonetheless, questions have arisen in these and other PR states about flood mismanagement, under-priced land sale, shady sand deals and nepotism. Besides, there are high profile leaders in the PR who were deeply involved in money politics and vote-buying not so long ago.

This is why in the struggle against corruption one should not expect a miracle to happen with the advent of a new government. The exercise of power invariably opens the door to temptation. Abraham Lincoln was right when he observed that the “true test of a person’s character is not when he is in adversity but when he has power.” This also explains why institutions outside the arena of power politics such as the Courts, enforcement agencies and people’s movements have been more effective in curbing corruption in democratic societies. It is these institutions that Malaysian citizens should help to strengthen.

There is another dimension to Great Expectations that many Chinese and Indian Malaysians in particular subscribe to. The PR leadership, they fervently hope, will bring to an end, policies that favour Malays and Bumiputras in certain specific areas. This will not happen because the Special Position of the Malays and the Bumiputras of Sabah and Sarawak is an entrenched Article in the Malaysian Constitution under the direct protection of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the Conference of Rulers. Neither the ballot box nor Parliament can change this. Even the Democratic Action Party (DAP) --- seen as the vehicle for some of these expectations--- has at its recent party congress reiterated its support for the Special Position Article in the Constitution.

The most that one can hope for is that the PR will implement policies emanating from Special Position in a fair and equitable manner. The BN--- many objective analysts will argue--- has also attempted to implement Special Position policies with an appreciable degree of justice. There have been occasions, however, over the last 54 years when BN leaders have faltered and failed. This has created anger and unhappiness among a lot of non-Malays and some Malays. Since the inability to place the public good over private gain is often the reason for deviation, one can expect this human failing to occur even when the PR or some other group is in power. Hence, the importance of eternal vigilance on the part of the citizenry.

A third and final dimension of Great Expectations is confined largely to the Muslims in PR and their backers. They are praying that with PR in power, the Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS) will be able to move steadily towards its ultimate goal of an Islamic State. Those issues that affect non-Muslims directly may be put on the back-burner for a while but other aspects of Fiqh (jurisprudence) pertaining to women, male-female interaction, culture and entertainment, and hudud, it is quite conceivable, will be implemented one way or another. PAS’s constituency which will be much more massive once it is on the saddle of power, its ideological orientation, and the influence of the ulama within and without the party, will ensure that it remains faithful to its agenda. It is very unlikely that Muslims from other parties in Parliament will openly oppose PAS’s Islamic agenda given the uncritical acceptance of ulama authority among Malaysian Muslims.

That PAS is determined to fulfil its ideological mission is borne out by its conduct after its best parliamentary performance ever in the 1999 General Election. Though it promised to uphold the common manifesto it shared with its other three partners in what was then collectively known as the Barisan Alternatif, --- a manifesto that made no mention of an Islamic State or hudud or fiqh--- PAS, which had captured Trengganu from the BN, proclaimed almost immediately that it would be enforcing the kharaj, an antiquated tax meant specifically for non-Muslims, in that state. The proposal was subsequently aborted partly because of protests from its partners. Nonetheless, PAS Trengganu later went ahead with its hudud legislation to prove its fidelity to its vision of Islam.

What this shows is that if Pakatan Rakyat comes to power in Putrajaya, PAS may be in a better position to achieve some of its Great Expectations compared to the DAP. Political and constitutional realities will constrain the latter. As for other Great Expectations about governance and integrity, Malaysians would do well to adopt a critical but balanced approach towards politicians of all stripes.

Our best hope lies in continuing to speak truth to power on both sides of the divide.

Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Yayasan 1Malaysia and Professor of Global Studies at Universiti Sains Malaysia.

12 February 2012.

1CARE Finally something worth reading- FMT

February 8, 2012

FMT LETTER: From TheBlack Cactus, via e-mail

In the last few weeks there has been sporadic debate on the proposed national health scheme dubbed 1Care in both the internet and the mainstream media. A collective conclusion shared by both the public and the very professionals alike (who play a major role in the system) is the uncanny ability to fully comprehend the confusing entity which remains an uncertainty till today.

This commentary was written to achieve the following objectives: 1 To help the public understand why this system was proposed and what led to the genesis of this scheme; 2 If possible, to pressure the government to be more transparent in providing information on the 1Care Scheme to allay fears among the general public; 3 To help the layperson understand the un-addressed policy issues but highly crucial perspectives surrounding the 1Care Scheme.

First, it would be wise to have a quick update on the prevailing Malaysian Health Care system so that it would help shine some light as to why there is a sudden accelerated interest to bring the 1Care Scheme into an imminent reality.

The Malaysian health care scenario

The Malaysian health care system has often been hailed globally for its ability to endorse a sustainable health policy that reflects an outstanding and equitable health status at a relatively low economic burden. By allocating just 3% of its GDP to health care (majority of industrialised countries invest rough about 6%, with the exception of the United States which devotes 16%), data compiled by World Health Organisation shows that the performance of the Malaysian health system is, in fact, highly efficient. This is evidenced by the “Health Adjusted Life Expectancy”(HALE) at birth indicator, which categorises Malaysia as equal to most industrialised countries at 63 years.

However, the complexity of the system has also brought in much uncertainty that has not only slowed down service delivery, but has been closely related to the gradual increase in economic burden. In an effort to make health care accessible (and most importantly equal) to all fabric of the society, the concept of Universal Health Care was formulated and adopted by most countries around the world including Malaysia.

The system attempts to finance the health benefits for all by a balance of tax revenues and medical insurance (mostly recommended by private health caregiver in Malaysia currently). This is imposed on employed, working class population. In Malaysia, much of the public medical fees are subsidised to a great extent from the much gained tax revenues.

It is important to note that the Ministry Of Health only manages to recover 3% of its total operating cost through fees collected at health care premises. The amount is strikingly lower than most payments made in most European health system (which employs the co-payment system where funds are partly subsidised by the government and the insurance premium paid by the patient). The average consultation at a token rate of RM1 at any primary care centre barely covers 1% of the economic cost per visit.

The resulting non sustainable system calls for fiscal limitations and will eventually cause much financial loss due to: 1 The spur of an unrealistic and unachievable demand for public health care; 2 The operational costs to cover universal health care will surpass the government’s current fiscal capacity.

By understanding this, it comes as no surprise that the proposed 1Care Scheme is a platform designed to re-coup the wastages from a bleeding pre-existing ( but noble and functional if properly handled) health care system that is sub-optimally managed. Like any other subsidised policies, the current health care system is resilient to any structural reform partly due to the lack of political will (where it is vital to appease voters by holding on to the unsustainable RM1 token fee and RM15-20 token fee paid at primary and specialist health clinics respectively) and the society itself whom have become so accustomed to enjoying cheap but scarce medical resources that has been perpetually vulnerable to potential abuse all these years.

The most important question: Where is the information?

Unlike most countries that have proposed and implemented such a scheme, information on the mechanics and the policies enshrined in the health care scheme is widely available for public scrutiny. One could easily access any updates and knowledge on the health care scheme through the Ministry Of Health website of the respective countries.

The same cannot be said for the 1Care system. The public, at large, have very patchy ideas on the health scheme without corroborative evidence from the Ministry Of Health. It would have been prudent, with all the disparate views available from all avenues of the mass media, to allay all concerns by allowing the public to peer into the workings of the proposed scheme or at least highlight the salient points that matters most to the average Malaysian. Efforts to make it an intellectual discourse by taking in question from the public would have been highly commendable.

Strangely, the documents or information regarding its modus operandi has remained elusive and is not available on the Ministry Of Health website (which is mandatory in most civil nations). The reason as to why this has been enshrouded in secrecy remains anyone’s best guess. However, one could only speculate that perhaps the precise knowledge of the system is within the confines of a privileged few elites who are still, themselves, grappling to reach a consensus on how to implement a scheme that is totally not viable given the current economic climate.

Hypothesised 1Care scheme model

With the escalating rate of medical expenditure in the country, a cost containment approach has to be put in place to eradicate or replace an ailing healthcare system that burdens the economy. One such option would be the 1Care Scheme. Given the very sketchy information on how this would be implemented, one could only draw inferences from other similar healthcare systems.

Bearing that in mind, it would suffice to say that the scheme would promote the technique of ‘managed care’ (by managed care organisations or MCOs) where the autonomy of patients is sacrificed and replaced by a predetermined set of rules. These rules govern patient’s rights to which doctor, the type of care and the kind of medications he/she receives. Many of us are aware of this issue has been given much focus in the previous attempts to describe the proposed health system in the media.

This has, in the past, led to reprisals mainly arising from public dissatisfaction. This was due to denial of care stemming from government legislation and tight labour rules that restricts the access one has to healthcare options. Employers would then offer private health care plans (which are private insurance plans) to fill in this vacuum so that employees could afford all available treatments. Ultimately (and to the contrary of cost containment), this incident would give rise to the ballooning of medical expenditure in the country.

Free treatment for all, really?

Unless the full blueprint is made public, one could only hypothesise the magnitude or the process of financing involved in the 1Care Scheme which is the crux of understanding how the whole system functions. The population might be divided up to two broad classes namely: The general public, and concessional patients (the ageing public, citizens below the poverty line, disabled/handicapped)

It will be compulsory for all working citizens of the general public, who have wages within the taxable bracket, to pay 10% of their earnings as contribution necessary for the funding of the scheme. Remember that this 10% tax does not mean that one is entitled to the type of care, it is just a contribution which is used to pay the wages of the physicians and other miscellaneous expenses (purchase of new equipments or subsidising the concessional patients, etc.). This will be collected as federal taxes.

Secondly, to be amenable to treatments within the system, the general public will have to take up an insurance policy (social health insurance). Treatments within this system will be closely regulated by MCOs which could mean that a patient might not be covered for a wide range of interventions (eg. optical surgeries, prosthesis, aesthetics etc.).

Just one burning question – Is the scheme really free in a manner that it provides universal healthcare in a similar vein to the current system? Will drugs be free now that payments have been made by contributing to taxes and insurance schemes? Read on carefully.

So much focus has been given to the taxable amount that we need to contribute but the society has become oblivious about other aspects of the mandatory payments that one has to make in order to get the full package of services available. In summary, this would be the likely formula for the 1Care Scheme : Social health insurance (SHI) + General taxation + minimal Co-payments for a defined Benefits Package.

The fundamentals of SHIs and general taxation have been explained in detail earlier. What are Copayments and Benefit Packages that are also an inherent part of the formula though?

Copayments are payments that have to be made by patients when their treatment has exceeded the threshold tolerated by the health scheme. Thus, a patient has to fork out a certain amount of money once the treatment requires more financial assistance due to the nature of their illness. Benefit packages seem define the type of insurance from which special group within the population will be stratified accordingly to separate those who deserve exemption from payments or their treatments costs partially subsidised.

Extrapolating from the statement above, even the casual layperson would demand an explanation by posing several questions below:

1 It was said that free treatment will be given to all. But what are these copayments then?

2 Will there be copayments for drugs? Is there a minimum pricing policy?

3 Which class of society will be eligible to total subsidy and exempted from all payments?

4 How will the general public gain access to other treatments that the SHI does not cover?

To minimise copayments, steps will be taken to provide cheap but ‘equally’ good quality drugs or services determined by the MCOs. This is called the minimum pricing policy, a key policy issue that has been very much in the shadows since the planning of 1Care policy.

MCOs will only allow more patient autonomy if they willing to endure an additional cost by purchasing an additional private insurance which will bestow certain benefits: Patients will now be provided with the added benefits which are not covered by the SHI policy.

Patients will be able to then choose doctors and types of procedures (dental/optical/physiotherapy that was previously not available in the SHI scheme)

Rise in public health care burden secondary

The trend of an increase in purchase of additional private health insurance will influence the increase in demand of services as a whole.With the access to an affordable yearly insurance premium, the growing population will have a lowered out-of-the pocket price to pay when seeking medical treatment. This will directly lead to the increase in market demand for health care services for the medical needy and indirectly cause the sudden surge of prices for medical services.

read more on this article on from website

Where is Malaysia's Geopolitical Compass Pointing Now? by Farish A Noor

A country never simply is, for what a country is also depends on how and where it positions itself in relation to other nation-states and other, external geo-political interests. Witness for instance the current location and standing of Pakistan, which has been cast of late in the light of an 'unreliable' ally and accused of harbouring pro-Taliban elements. Pakistan's international standing is as much a result of its own choices as it is the result of how the external world looks at it - and in the case of the latter the opinion of the global media is often instrumental in determining the standing and fate of nations too. Today Pakistan is labelled all sorts of things, but remember that this is the same country that was, in the 1980s, considered one of the most vital allies to the West thanks to its support of the campaign against the Soviets in Afghanistan. This is also the country that has taken in millions of refugees from Afghanistan, with little credit given to it. And dont forget that it was also Pakistan that was the crucial go-between the during the Nixon era when Washington wanted to re-open channels of dialogue with China.

Malaysia's standing has also shifted over the past six decades, and this has reflected the geo-political and geo-strategic realities of the Cold War and the power vacuumm that followed in its wake. But in the case of Malaysia, one important shift has occured, even if it has passed largely unnoticed by many. By this I am referring to how Malaysia - in the 1980s and 1990s - seemed to have had slightly more clout than it does today, simply because of the ideological subject-positions it assumed then.

In the 1980s and 1990s Malaysia stood in the camp that opposed the Apartheid regime in South Africa, and took the opportunity to denounce Apartheid in several regional and international forums. It also took a stand on issues such as Palestine and other third-world interests. Perhaps one of the reasons that Malaysia was able to do so then was that it was economically in a better position, thanks in part to the inflow of foreign direct investment FDI that made it an attractive destination for countries that sought new pastures to invest in after the global recession of the early 1980s. Malaysia, like the other countries of ASEAN then, benefitted from this global climate and was able to chart double-digit growth like its neighbours Singapore, Indonesia and Thailand. Looking back at that period it can be seen that the governments of ASEAN were somewhat more bullish about their ambitions and standing internationally, and argued from a position of relative leverage and confidence.

But what has happened since then? The lingering impact of the East Asian financial crisis of 1997/98 and the global economic slowdown since then has meant that the region has begun to lose out to other, newer markets and cheaper economies. All the countries of the region have been affected, and the past decade has witnessed some of the countries of ASEAN trying their darnest to win back the support and confidence of the international business community in order to kick-start their economies and to cater to the basic needs of their respective political constituencies.

Perhaps we in the ASEAN region had it too good for too long; and perhaps we cannot get over the fact that the good old days of the boom decades of the 1980s and 1990s may never return with the same force and vigour that we might hope. Across the ASEAN region now we can see that almost all of the governments of ASEAN are busying themselves with the task of structural adjustment - that comes in the form of privatisation policies and the withdrawal of the state, leaving society to the forces of the free market. In the meantime many economic reformers in the region are now chanting the same universal mantra of privatisation, liberalisation and free market economics, which is none other than the mantra of what we call the Washington consensus.

As an Malaysian academic who views the developments in his country from afar, I sometimes fear for the future of our nation. I find myself particularly worried when some of our leaders and/or prospective leaders make their way to Washington and repeat the same mantra of the Washington consensus in the Western press. I find myself worried when I see Malaysian politicians echoing sentiments that conform to the geo-strategic consensus that has become hegemonic in the corridors of Washington too. I find myself worried when Malaysian politicians seem inclined to dress themselves in the garb of moderates in order to win the affection and support of their lobbyists in Washington as well.

What has happened to the ethos of the 1980s and 1990s, when Malaysia - admittedly a small and modest country without military might or ambitions - still had the principle to condemn Apartheid for what it was? What has happened to the political leadership of this country - and here I refer to all parties - when in the recent past we stood for things like South-South co-operation and other subaltern interests? Cynics may note that many of these initiatives did not take Malaysia very far - but at least this country's leadership had some principles, however unrealistic they were. At least Malaysia meant something.

Over the past decade I feel as if I have aged half a century. When I look to the future, I am gripped with the fear of what Malaysia might become: An open market that serves as a conduit for capital, but with no identity and/or principles? Yes, we are a small nation, a modest nation. And yes, we have never posed an existential threat to anyone, nor have we imposed our model on anyone. But a nation, no matter how young or small, is still entitled to some sense of collective dignity and sovereignty. No matter how small, even the smallest nations have the right to a voice, and to speak its mind.

As I look to the future, my heart sinks at times. Our politics has grown mundane, parochial and introverted; and we ignore the shifting geo-political realities around us at our peril. Worse of all some of our politicians who seem so inclined to be the darlings of the Western press seem to forget that the readers of the Washington Post or Wall Street Journal are not going to be the ones who vote for them; but their fellow Malaysians. So this is my plea to all the politicians and aspiring leaders of this country: As we face what may well be the most difficult decade of our country's history, turn to the Malaysian nation and think of the national interest. There is no point in becoming the darling of CNN, BBC, WSJ or WP if in the process you end up abandoning the nation that is, after all, your home.

End.

for the full articles and comments

Corruption - Then and now by Yap Lim Sen - Yayasan 1 Malaysia

Corruption in our country is rampant. People have become cynical and take it for granted that all politicians, bureaucrats and businessmen are corrupt if given the opportunity. How did we arrive at this state of affairs?

To better appreciate the issue of corruption, I thought I should tell the story of my first encounter with corruption at the age of 18 in 1952.

I had joined the Technical College Kuala Lumpur. We had hardly settled down when my college mates started talking about the opportunities for making money from contractors after graduation. It came as a shock to me. How did my young college mates know about such matters? Public Works Department was considered the most desirable, since there were more dealings with contractors, while those joining the survey and telecoms departments were pitied for having no opportunity to make money. The words “corruption” or “bribe” were never used.

The stories I heard in college were played out in real life when I began working in the Irrigation Department in a small town. It was known to everyone in the office that those connected with any dealings involving suppliers and contractors would get some “reward”. The sums involved were small and the transactions always friendly. Later I resigned to practice as a consulting engineer. I was rather taken aback when my father’s friends—some of whom were well-respected community elders—called me a fool for leaving the “lucrative” government service.

With the onset of large-scale property development, these transactions became more substantial in the ‘60s. The rights to land concessions, especially in prime areas like the Klang Valley, imparted enormous wealth to recipients. It was the same with land conversions from agricultural use to building, as well as the rights to forest concessions particularly in East Malaysia. The “coffee money” of the old days soon became serious money running to millions of ringgit.

Read more on this article

The Country in My Blood by Alvin Teoh - Loyar Burok

Alvin Teoh, Executive Creative Director of NagaDDB, shares with us a Malaysia we can hopefully still remember in the years to come.

I love Malaysia. I mean, I could do with some nice, cool San Francisco weather sometimes, but yeah, I love this lady because she’s such a part of me.

Recently, I joined an international community of Catholics on the net. I thought it’d be cool to exchange views of our universal faith with people from all over the world. (Having the occasional fight online is exciting, too). But one thing about the community stood out. Amazing and learned as some of them were, I did find some of their points of view a tad narrow. Not so much because of the faith, but more so, I feel, because of their monolithic culture.

Quite unlike our rojak one, hor?

Over the years, I am blessed to have met Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Sikhs, Protestants, Agnostics, Malays, Chinese, Indians, Eurasians, ‘Bananas’, ‘Chindians’, ‘Mat-Salleh Celups’, ‘Rockers’, ‘Jinjang-Joes’, ‘Diskangs’, and those categorised as ‘Dan lain-lain’.

Different colour, different faiths, same mischievousness | Photo by Alvin Teoh

My first real friend was a John Skelchy. He was as Eurasian as they come. We met in kindergarten when we were 5. From him I learnt that boys have penises and girls, something different altogether. One day, our teacher caught us comparing private parts. Our parents were called, and so, they too became friends. This Skelchy fellow was my classmate all the way to form 5.

In Standard 1, I met Sheik Faizal. He didn’t look like the average Malay boy. I have to admit he was rather good looking. I wonder if he had Arab blood. He was a great artist; he could do caricatures. And he did a mean pencil sketch of characters from ‘Planet of the Apes’. We hung out all the way through Standard 6. He was a very deep and intense sort of fellow. He wrote in my book:

Read more on this article

Geneticist clarifies role of Proto-Malays in human origin by Aidila Razak- Malaysia Kini

INTERVIEW Leading Oxford University geneticist Dr Stephen Oppenheimer is taken aback by how politically charged the research into the origins of human population is in Malaysia.

Most recently, strong reaction had arisen over media coverage of a conference on the origins of the Malay race, which marked the Orang Asli - the Senoi, Semang and the Proto-Malays - as torchbearers of the modern human race.

Clarifying this finding in an interview last week, Oppenheimer said the Orang Asli, particularly the Semang and the Proto-Malays are direct descendants of the first humans who stepped foot in South-East Asia (then Sunda), and are “ancestral” for east Asia and the Americas.

“Particularly, the Semang and the Proto-Malay have lineages which are characteristic and very unique to their own populations, which clearly have a local geographic distribution. So they have been here since the original settlers...,” he said.

Sequencing random mutations in mitochondrial DNA, a type of DNA inherited only from mothers, Oppenheimer traces the origins of human population, from the first human in Africa, to the homeland of Europeans in the Arabian gulf and to homeland of east Asians in Sunda.

Oppenheimer was in Kuala Lumpur last Friday to present a paper at the Asal Usul Melayu: Induknya di Alam Melayu conference organised by the Association of Malaysian Archeologists.

He is the author of the books ‘Eden in the East’ and ‘Out of Eden’ which details his theories on human population migration. A graphic presentation of his research can be found here.

Excerpts of the interview follow. The content has been edited for language, brevity and flow.

Malaysiakini: You use your research in mitochondrial DNA to trace the origins of the human population. Your theory is that there was only one single migration out of Africa.

Stephen Oppenheimer: The ancestry of all humans living today is from Africa. From looking at the mitochondrial tree, for the whole human species that is still alive today, you'll find most of the branches and roots are in Africa. When you look at the rest of the world, it belongs to one twig of the African tree.

read more on this article