Still not too late to declare state of emergency!

The period for full recovery from the devastation can be cut down to two months.

KUALA LUMPUR: The Opposition feels it is still not too late for Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak to declare a state of emergency in the flood-stricken states to mobilise the 150,000-strong armed forces to deal with the worsening situation in many areas and the huge post-flood challenges in others.

The Opposition has taken the position that a state of emergency will make it easier and faster to mobilise all federal, state and local resources to deal with the worst flood disaster in living memory.

It would also make it easier to deal with the post-flood situation in states where, although the worst is over with the receding of flood waters, new problems are beginning with the mind-boggling scale and scope of the post-flood challenges and dangers, added the Opposition in a statement issued on its behalf by DAP elder statesman Lim Kit Siang.

“The Kelantan Menteri Besar Ahmad Yaakob has said that Kelantan will need at least six months to fully recover from the devastation that hit the state in the past few weeks.”

Six months to recover from the catastrophe is too long, he added, “and will impose great problems and grave burdens on the flood victims in Kelantan”.

Lim, who is also DAP Parliamentary Leader and Gelang Patah MP, urged that the period for the full recovery from the devastation should be cut down from “at least six months” to two months.

In fact, continued Lim, a state of emergency should be a normal part of the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to deal with a major disaster.

He called for a total revamp of the mindset and mentality on Disaster Management Plans and Preparedness. “The declaration of a state of emergency for stricken states or regions should be an integral part of the SOP”.

The Prime Minister, he reiterated, was clearly misled when he said that a state of emergency could not be declared because it would absolve insurance companies from having to pay compensation to the insured. “This has been debunked by the General Insurance Association of Malaysia (Piam).”

The Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin was also wrong, argued Lim, when he said that there was no need to declare a state of emergency “unless there was a critical situation, such as when the electricity and water supplies were completely cut off or when the number of flood victims reached hundreds of thousands of people”.

Muhyiddin seemed not to know that for thousands of flood victims, electricity and water supplies have been completely cut off for more than a week, pointed out Lim. “Is this not an emergency?”

A state of emergency arising from a catastrophe will be limited in place and time.

Lim conceded that Malaysians as a whole are quite reluctant to support a declaration of state of emergency.

“Their experience has been with state of emergencies being permanent and misused to serve the interests of the Executive,” he noted. “Examples include the emergencies arising from Indonesian Confrontation in 1965, the Sarawak Political Crisis in 1967, the May 13 Riots in 1969 and the Kelantan Political Crisis in 1977.”

A state of emergency arising from a catastrophe will be limited both in place and time, he stressed, confined only to the flood-stricken areas and “will lapse as soon as the catastrophe and challenges and dangers have been dealt with”.

If the military forces in other countries can render national service in times of national disasters, said Lim, there is no reason why this cannot be done in Malaysia.