Orientation Week - Unraveled

To be honest, this is a post which should have been written a long long time ago. Well, I didn’t quite find the need to do so until recently, when the past finally caught up with me. Sensational stories of my “improper” conduct during my time as a  JKO resurfaced once again. Before I cut to the chase, allow me to share my paltry experience on what orientation week actually means to me. As I’ve played both the roles of the prey and also the predator of such “motivational” programme, it is in my humble belief that I am able to speak on behalf of both the freshmen and also the JKOs.

As a freshie, faculty orientation was HELL albeit most of the programmes make more sense compared to the 5.30am Tokoh-Sukan-Rosmah “senam-robiks” which we had for the college orientation. We were hounded and yelled at over the simplest and silliest of things. Our discipline, courage, perseverance and unity as a batch was tested to its very limits. Never have I had a peaceful start to the day. Seriously! Nevertheless, it was also a week where I managed to pick up invaluable advices from most of the final year JKOs who were strict yet down-to-earth. Apart from the ongoing dramas throughout the week, I actually had an insight of the flaws which the orientation week could work on in order for it to remain relevant today. All of these experiences culminated in one sheet of paper which went on to be awarded the best essay for the orientation week. It was a very honest and no-holds barred essay of which I praised the team for their effort in conducting beneficial  academic programmes and for maintaining their professionalism yet stating my utmost disagreement of how the week went. Most important of all, like what any other freshie would have asked, why the constant yelling? Why the sour/ poker faces? It was based on this essay that I set out on a mission to try and make that little fine- tuning which the orientation week, in my humble opinion, desperately needed.  

Fast forward a year later, I found myself to be among the “elite” few who were fortunate enough to be given such an opportunity to be part of the “glamorous” JKO team. Whether it was an opportune time to finally feel what it is like being the oppressors this time around or an opportune time to make a change to a flawed programme is a matter of perception. Personally, it was definitely the latter. Being a JKO was anything but a strange feeling for me. I felt as if I was Darth Vader. Someone who had previously questioned such approach was now one of “them”. And so I dressed as sharp as I could. Formal black and white from head to toe while capping it off by putting on the sourest of sour face that I could come up with. The power and respect that I had commanded within hours let alone minutes was unbelievable. Freshies were coming up to me, greeting and nodding their heads as a sign of respecting a “senior”. Although I felt respected among the freshies but I knew that this form of respect was illusory. It was hollow. I knew that respect should not be forced upon someone who was trying to come to terms with being in a new environment. Respect should undoubtedly be earned. Constant yelling, PMS attitudes and po-po-po-po-po-po-poker faces would only turn you into a disillusioned Loki-like person who thinks that every word you uttered meant a whole lot to the freshies and every action of yours is exemplary and motivational to them.

Bearing that in mind, I quickly sought to change my approach, something which would be severely criticised by the other JKO members later on. A good cop vs bad cop scenario should do the trick. I opted for the former as there were numerous actors for the bad cop role. No, I was never as soft as an octopus. Stern but approachable, that’s the name of the game. Then came the mother of all conspiracies. I was alleged to be giving out “free” signatures without ease to the freshies. It was a practice for many years that freshies would have to obtain signature from the seniors and JKOs as part of getting to know them better. I was criticised for not putting up any “resistance” before penning my signature on the form. With all due respect, I don’t find the need to “model” my sour face or reject the freshie when they had taken the initiative and draw upon whatever courage that they have left to come up to a “dictator” like us with the intention of wanting to know a little thing or two about the faculty or whatever information which is sought by them. As a matter of fact, giving out my worthless signature was by far the best part of orientation week compared to all the dramas which was going on in the auditorium.  It gave me that sense of accomplishment and satisfaction to know that whatever mistakes that I’ve made during my first year was shared to the juniors, that I had faced the same issue in adapting to a new system and a new environment, that I too was as naïve and as afraid as they were during my first year. If there was anything that I would miss from the orientation week, this had to be it. I stand firm on my belief that this should be the right approach which should be adopted by the JKOs in ensuring that the orientation week remains relevant in “welcoming” the freshies to the faculty and that whoever who alleged that I was “too soft” in my approach should respect my actions just like how I respect your approach by not going around the faculty condemning your actions.

On another note, the newly appointed members of the orientation week looks to be a promising lot but nothing changes if the mindset and approach remains the same. I must stress here again that respect is sought to be earned, not forced upon. The fact that the coming batch of students are far more mischievous and rebellious compared to this year’s batch only sets up an exciting plot for the neutrals like me. Nevertheless, I have my utmost faith in the new Mdm. Director having worked with her on my previous LawNite project and also to her team of JKOs. 

With all due respect, I would humbly subscribe to Prof. Norchaya’s approach in gaining a person’s respect rather than a few other lecturers’ approach in throwing tantrums and yelling every now and then to garner the students’ attention. Times have changed. Student attitudes have changed. If they are bold enough to go against the university administrators or even to get into a scuffle with the police, what makes you think that they would remain in silent over the mistreatment which you’re dishing out to them? To quote a first year student, Qamariah (if the spelling is right), “Why should we continue with such practice just because it is a tradition in the faculty?” Think about it.

Please do not see this as a sulking behaviour on my part for not being in the JKO team as I've already made up my mind on my participation way before the new board was appointed. Anyways, good luck JKOs. =)

Racism Through My (Contact) Lenses

     There’s only two Indian (sorry, can’t distinguish between tamil and hindi) movies which I’ve actually watched the whole length of it throughout my 22 years. The first being the practical, humourous and inspirational tale of 3 Idiots which left a deep impression in me that we should always “chase for excellence, then success would follow” and when you need to calm yourself down, just recite the mantra “All Iz Well”.

     The second movie, My Name is Khan, concerns an American Muslim man with Asperger's syndrome  who embarks on a cross-country journey post-September 11, determined to convey a message to the American President that “My Name is Khan, and I’m not a terrorist”. Now this is a highly recommended movie not only for the Muslims per se, but it can definitely be an inspiration for the other races in Malaysia as to how the objective of “1Malaysia” can be the new Malaysian dream rather than being just another propaganda or lip service by the government. To date, 1Malaysia seems to sound just like another hypermarket in the country. With products ranging from 1Malaysia Meal Plan to 1Malaysia Broadband, 1Malaysia Clinic to “Kedai Cuci Kereta 1Malaysia”, the ideology propounded by Najib seems to be too commercialised that it has lost its intended purpose which is to achieve racial unity.

     This brings me to the main topic of discussion – racism. You see, I’ve never been a fan of racism and I’m sure many of you would concur with me. I couldn’t give a damn if the next Prime Minister is an Indian or a woman so long as the rakyat could benefit from it. I couldn’t care less if affirmative actions such as the NEP are implemented as long as it is equally distributed among all the races and not for the Malay cronies because at the end of the day, the funds injected are taken from tax-payers money who is contributed by everyone regardless of their race.

A football fan holding up a banner against the racism saga between Manchester United and Liverpool players

     Personally, aside from the political motives of playing the racial card and a minority of extremists, I’ve never thought that racism was prevalent in Malaysia. What we undeniably have here is “stereotype” and “prejudice”. The former means to have a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing while the latter refers to a preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience. The most widely known “stereotype” in Malaysia would be “Malays are lazy, Chinese are gamblers and stingy while Indians are drunken”.

     On the other hand, “racism” is the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races. The prime example would be in a job interview. A Malay interviewee enters into the room where the interviewers are made up of Chinese and interviewer goes, “Oh orang Melayu” while trying to get the session over with a.s.a.p. without going through his qualification. Here’s what the big fuss is all about. Why should the interviewer categorise the interviewee in the first place? Does it mean that by being a Malay he should be inferior to the other Chinese candidates?

     Another issue which caught my attention with regards to racism is the fact that there are certain shallow minded people who would vote for a person of the same race in order for that particular race to remain in power within that organisation. By doing so, it is of no benefit to your own race or any other race. What ever happened to “let the best man win”? Such mindset would only have a ripple-effect in the sense that the most qualified candidate is not elected and thus, the organisation would not be run at its optimum. Ironically, at the end of his/her term in office, the same people who voted for him/her would bombard her with questions as to why things are not being done and promises not fulfilled.

     These are just a couple of examples which I’ve witnessed for myself and also heard of racial remarks being made in my very own faculty. Look, it is a bold statement I’m making and it could stir up some backlash but this is something widespread in the faculty. It’s just one of those ‘the birds and the bees’ story which your parents never told you about but you sort of get the idea of what is happening. This is the faculty which would most probably produce the next Prime Minister as compared to the other faculties and it is worrying if  he/she is poisoned by such racial mindset. If a man with Aspenger’s syndrome could look beyond cultural, religious and racial differences, what is then left of our sanity?

This picture was taken from the 45 most powerful images of 2011 showing Christians protecting the Muslims during prayer in Cairo, Egypt. 

The writer condemns such mindset which is prevalent not only in his faculty but also in his beloved Malaysia. His close friends during high school were mostly Indians and Malays. He is quite perplexed to the fact that if the Malay satay, Chinese assam laksa and Indian’s roti canai could be served on the same table without being judged which food taste better than the other, then why can’t we just do the same to each other? He intends to not fill up the race column in registration forms as a protest of categorise a person by its race and hopes that others would follow suit. His name is Eugene and he’s not a racist.

Dear Ministers, Your Reasonings Are Flawed

            Just when most Malaysians could breathe a sigh of relief that finally people who have the right knowledge of the law is making the headlines again following the decision of the Court of Appeal in the UKM 4 case, our brilliant and entertaining ministers in the PM Department had to prove us wrong all over again. In the latest instalment of “How I Met My Silly Politician”, the two ministers were commenting on the issue of homosexuality and how it was considered to be unconstitutional by both men who had very interesting and “creative” arguments in which they hope (I assume) will mislead the public into thinking that being a gay or lesbian is unconstitutional. That in the event you are torn in between both sexes, you SHALL flip a coin and choose one sex because the constitution said so. I’m sorry Mr. and Mr. Minister, but I’ll have to say that both of the arguments are flawed.

            The first minister, who is in charge of Islamic affairs and Jakim stated that being gay is unconstitutional by virtue of section 377(a), (b), (c) and (d) of the Penal Code which relates to carnal intercourse against the order of nature. “Whoa!”, “wa lau eh” and “fuyoh” would probably be a response from any lay men. However, anyone who has a legal background would not be perplexed upon hearing such silly argument because in order to determine if something is unconstitutional, you’ll have to rely upon the supreme law of the land, the Federal Constitution and not on the basis of an ordinary law such as the Penal Code. If we were to follow in the Minister’s argument based on the Penal Code to determine the constitutionality of being a homosexual, it would mean that anyone has the right to be gay so long as he/she does not commit any carnal intercourse as provided in section 377. Besides, it also means that a he can grab another he’s testicles and make out affectionately in public with each other as long as one of them does not stick his penis into the other’s anus. According to the Minister, such a relationship is permitted under the law. Being a disciple of the law, I’m afraid I can’t follow his argument.

            True to the song “Two Is Better Than One” by Taylor Swift, the de facto law Minister came to the rescue in order to divert the attention from the donkey (sorry but I can’t help to say it) above. With the spot light upon him, the Minister raised Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution which provides that “Islam is the religion of the Federation but other religions may be practiced…..” and claimed that an act which is against Islam is deemed to be unconstitutional. With not all due respect to the Minister, I would like to humbly reject his argument based on two grounds. Firstly, that Malaysia is a secular state and thus, the constitutionality of any law should be measured against the Federal Constitution and not any Islamic law. Subsequent to Independence, Tunku Abdul Rahman made an announcement to the Parliament that “I would like to make it clear that this country is not an Islamic State as it is generally understood, we merely provided that Islam shall be the official religion of the State.” Alternatively, in the landmark case of Che Omar b Che Soh v PP, Salleh Abas L.P. held that Malaysia is a secular state. This goes to show that the Federal Constitution is the supreme law of the land instead of Islam. Secondly, an act should not be deemed to be unconstitutional by virtue of it contradicting with the religion of Islam. There are many acts which are against the values of Islam such as gambling or consumption of alcohol or pork but these acts are not regarded as unconstitutional. Laws which govern the Muslims should never be imposed upon the non-Muslim.

            Nothing in the constitution denies anyone of his or her identity based solely on their sexuality. Notwithstanding, what is actually provided in the constitution, more specifically in Article 5, is the right to life and this ‘life’ should not only be construed in the narrow sense but also the right to a ‘quality of life’ which is free from any discrimination based on one’s sexuality. What would be unconstitutional in my view, is when we deny this minority group to be who they are and discriminate or marginalise them. In addition, it would also be "unconstitutional" for a politician to mislead the public on the law and to issue a sweeping statement without ascertaining the validity of his statement. Now that you know the truth and nothing but the truth which includes knowing the fact that the tax-payers’ money is spent on such baboons, I’d like to table a motion (not to pass motion but) to have Lord Bobo of LoyarBurok to take over their places. Besides, he’d only cost us bananas. 

Unconstitutionality of UUCA: A Victory for Varsity Students

Note: The following post was meant to be my answer script for my English “mid-semester break distraction” homework. What better way than to slug it out through a no-holds barred approach?

          The recent Court of Appeal’s 2-1 majority decision to declare Section 15(5)(a) of the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 (UUCA) unconstitutional should not only be viewed as a victory for all local university students but should also be rejoiced upon by all Malaysians. The unconstitutionality of the said provision signifies that it is no longer applicable and cannot be enforced in our country. Section 15(5)(a) of the said oppressive Act reads “No student of the University and no organisation body or group of students of the University which is established by under or in accordance with the Constitution shall express or do anything which may reasonably be construed as expressing support for or sympathy with or opposition to any political party whether in or outside Malaysia ”. 

            This declaration made by the court that the said provision is null and void has been a long time coming as it violates the freedom of speech and expression which is provided under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution which is the supreme law of the land. According to one of the judges who decided in favour the UKM4, Mohd Hishamudin Mohd Yunus J, he said “Freedom of expression is one of the most fundamental rights that individuals enjoy. It is fundamental to the existence of democracy and the respect of human dignity.” 

       Following the learned judge’s argument, it is absurd to impose such restrictions upon university students who should be given the avenue and encouragement to broaden their mindset and be critical on the various issues affecting not only the country but also their lives. It is even more absurd to come to think that someone who is working in McDonald’s or a student sitting for PMR has more rights to express their views compared to a law student in University of Malaya where such freedom (although not absolute) has been guaranteed and enshrined in our Constitution. 

         Alternatively, as highlighted by the Court of Appeal, section 15(5)(a) directly contradicts with Article 119 of the Federal Constitution which entitles anyone who has reached the age of twenty-one to register as a voter and exercise his or her rights under the country’s democratic system. Considering the fact that anyone who has attained the age of twenty-one and is pursuing his education in a local university is allowed to vote, this infers his support towards a particular political party which is a form of expression and participation in politics. Thus, it is silly that section 15(5)(a) disallows university students to express their views on their political stand. What doesn’t make sense is that anyone who has attained the age of majority is allowed to get married, start a family, obtain a driving licence or even be a Prime Minister but their political views are bound by the UUCA. 

           According to the Minister of Higher Education, he said “The main goal of education is to encourage students to think constructively and critically without any restrictions. By just toeing the party line, the student is merely having other people's opinions, not his own.” In my humble opinion, there is no way I can agree with the statement made. Firstly, the statement made by the Minister is in direct contradiction itself. How are university students supposed to think constructively and critically without any restrictions when the provision is restrictive in nature? With regards to his second sentence, it is of grave disrespect to the thousands of local university student out there to say that we are not able to form our own opinion. Judging by the issue of brain-drain which is affecting our country, I believe Malaysian students are far more than capable of having their own opinion. The problem is and has always been due to the prohibition under the Act. 

           It is time for the legislature to act upon such declaration made by the Court of Appeal and repeal the said provision although the Government may appeal to the Federal Court to overturn the decision. This ruling should be seen as an opportunity for the legislature to do the right thing. Even the dissenting judge in the case said in his judgment that “by way of obiter, Parliament may wish to consider an amendment to section 15(5) in particular and the whole Act in general so as to bring about a repeal or review thereof.” The decision to repeal the provision should not made be due to the pressure of certain parties who might have their own agenda or to protect their students from ‘unwanted’ distractions but should be made solely based on its unconstitutionality. 

        This landmark decision was a milestone in the sense that it has indicated that our courts are no longer afraid of confronting constitutional issues rather that side-stepping it (which they have done so in many previous occasions) and uphold the notion of constitutionalism in our country. Although it is rather optimistic (and too early) to say that our judiciary had taken a paradigm shift and exercised a certain degree of judicial independence in addressing such issue, nevertheless, there is at least a glimpse of hope for all Malaysians that there still exists brave and insightful judges in our judiciary such as Mohd Hishamudin Mohd Yunus J and Linton Albert J to take over from the likes of NH Chan J. 

        In spite of what has been said, what is evident from this case is that there are judges (though not many) in our courts who understand and appreciate the idea of constitutionalism and rights to fundamental liberties, there are determined lawyers who are willing to argue for this principle and there are students who are brave enough to stand up and fight for their rights. Although the government might appeal against the decision and who knows, the Federal Court might overrule it but for now, let us rejoice at the historic judgment. 

Back In Black

          I’d be lying if I were to say that there wasn’t a moment in my four months semester break where I was actually anticipating for the start of the new academic year. Constitutional law, J.K.O., leading the LawNite troopers and also finally shifting out of 1^st college into my Shangri-la really excited me. What I didn’t know was that there was an element of misrepresentation in my vivid imagination where I had overlooked the fact that there were hundreds of cases to be read up for each subject, rushing of assignment deadlines, very vocal juniors to orientate and the prospect of main masak-masak for my dinner. Oh yes. Damn I was eager to get back!

          The good life began with Orientation Week 2011/12. After being picked on by the J.K.O.s as a freshie last year, I was definitely out to get my revenge successor. The Orientation Week is traditionally conducted by the Jawatankuasa Orientasi which is made up of 2^nd, 3^rd and final year seniors. Personally, this is an activity where a majority of the students would want to join maybe because of the exclusivity or professionalism which the juniors had witnessed when they were ragged orientated in first year. The Men In Black suits coupled with the ice-cool attitude and poker face was the theme of the week. First day of orientation as a J.K.O. was an unforgettable feeling. Although we had the upper hand of being the predator rather than prey, I was really nervous to meet the juniors for the first time. Heck! Imagine what would’ve happened if you were to slip while walking macho-ly or had forgotten to zip your pants and a junior pointed that out to you? %$#*$##@! Talk about freaking each other out juniors! Phew. Nevertheless, what really impressed me most about them was how vocal and rebellious they were which might be counter-productive if they are unable to draw the fine line between being vocal and being disrespectful or showing-off. At the end of the week, it was worthwhile to wake up at 6.30a.m. daily and being a steam chicken soaking up the heat while wearing blazer just for the sake of ragging getting to know the juniors.

The Men (and Ladies) In Black. Owh yeah baby!

Muahahahaha.....

          Then there’s the pleasant “headache” of organising the most glamorous and memorable LawNite the faculty has witnessed. Just to enlighten those who are oblivious to LawNite, succinctly, it is an annual dinner attended by lawyers and academicians, staffs and students of the faculty. It is a pleasant “headache” because it allows you to learn through the hard way on how an organisation is being run. From understanding and approving the budgets to putting up with the university administrator’s bureaucracy and “efficient and friendly” service, there’s more to it than just merely managing your human resources when it comes to being the director. Fortunately,  with a group of creative, exciting and zestful members along with the continuous support of the Law Society, it just makes my job that lil’ bit easier. Oh, did I mention that they are also unbelievably talented too? I guess only time will tell how successful it will be this year. *fingers crossed*

          On the academic “menu”, the subjects this year have been rather interesting compared to last year’s which is why I guess there isn’t any temptation to doze off. For appetisers, there’s Criminal law cases to cater for the weekly CSI dramas followed by soup of the day, Employment law which serves a healthy dose of Common law cases for you to memorise and regurgitate. Then we have the main event, the entré Constitutional law dressed with current issues such as the implementation of hudud law, repeal of ISA and the recent Court of Appeal decision on the UUCA to complement the subject. As for deserts, there’s the interesting and debatable issues in Public International law and last but not least, the “dry” and technical Land law which must be cooked “very well done” (you’ll have to attend Land law lecturers to understand this term). As for tutorials, being able to work closely with Professor Khaw Lake Tee who happens to be SUHAKAM Commissioner and the closest thing to “Twin Cities” from Real Steel for her ability to advocate a case from different perspectives, is just an added bonus having been able to experience the same brain-orgasmic effect of attending Prof. Norchaya’s classes.


          Apart from the roller-coaster experiences above, life’s been a lil’ less merrier without the “hostile” mak ciks at my previous college’s dewan makan and the “tele-chubbies” who have been shipped to America and South Korea albeit the American version will be back sooner and fatter. *hoping for souveniers* In a nutshell, life’s been better this year if you don’t consider the four assignments, two test and one disgusting housemate which I’ll have to put up to. Let’s just hope that my next post would not be made some three months later.  

"Footprints"

Note: At a time where I began to question the existence of God in my life, I stumbled upon an old piece of note hung at a wall while I was rushing to bind my Criminal Law Assignment. Although there’s still a possibility of me being an Atheist, but you just can’t help to think that miracles don’t just happen by itself in life. Here’s the note which got me questioning all over again:

                One night I had a dream…I dreamed I was walking along the beach with God and across the sky flashed scenes of my life. For each scene, I notice two sets of footprints in the sand, one belonged to me and the other to God. When the last scene of my life flashed before us I looked back, at the footprints in the sand.

            I also noticed that at times along the path of life there was only one set of footprints. I also noticed that it happened at the very lowest and saddest time of my life. This really bothered me and I asked God about it.

            “God, you said that once I decided to follow you, you would walk with me all the way, but I noticed that during the most troublesome time in my life there is only one set of footprints. I don’t understand why in times I needed you most, you would leave me.” God replied, “My precious, precious child, I love you and I would never, ever leave you alone during your times of trials and suffering.”

            “When you only see one set of footprints, it was then that I carried you.”

Nothing Odd About Odd Jobs

          School’s out and the holidays are here for the next four months or so. For those of you planning to earn the extra cash during this period, I’d like to share with you my paltry experience of being an odd-jobber. An odd-jobber as defined in dictionary.com means to work at a series of unrelated or unspecialized jobs, often of a low-paying or sometimes degrading in nature. I’d like to differ with that. This definition actually reflects society’s perception towards such group of working class – lowly paid, menial and irresponsible people who would let life take them where ever they may go. I too was of the same view not so long ago and I bet that most of you reading this post would feel the same way.

            You see, I had the privilege of experiencing what it feels like to work in both worlds. Before I started taking up odd-jobs, I previously worked as a full-timer in Holiday Inn Melaka as an F&B Assistant. I know it sounds fulamak-ish but it actually means ‘waiter’. Most of you would’ve contemplated on taking full-time jobs such as in hotels, cafes, boutiques, fast-food chains, cinema or etc. One which provides you with a steady monthly income and fixed working schedules. I had no qualms being a full-timer until I felt the grass on the other side of the fence.

            Odd-jobbers are mostly part-timers. We do various jobs from being promoters at shopping centers or events to being mascots, surveyors, merchandisers, flyers distributors and event crews. These are only a handful of jobs which I’ve explored so far in my reasonable ‘career’ as an odd-jobber. When I first started out, I was paranoid as to what people would think of me. Lowly paid? No direction in life? Frankly, it is not a job where every youth would jump into. However, the lucrative salary kept me going and since then, I’ve never looked back to working as a full-timer.

            If I could persuade you to take the road less traveled, I’d like to highlight a few benefits of being an odd-jobber. Firstly, an odd-jobber earns at least 2.5 or 3 times more than any full-timer. You’ll be able to earn salaries up to RM150 per day depending on the type of jobs you take (emphasis added). Secondly, for the same amount of salary that a full-timer is earning, you’ll only have to work during weekends. So why would you want to work for twelve hours a day for the whole week when you could just work for an average of eight to nine hours daily during weekends? You don’t need to be a rocket-scientist to work out the maths. Besides, the working schedule is also flexible. You’re not tied down to any obligation or contract and the jobs you get are on weekly basis. How convenient!

            In addition, you’ll be able to meet people from all walks of life be it kids, the elderly, the low incomes or the snobbish rich ones. This direct interaction makes you feel more connected to society and brings yourself down to their level. To tell you the truth, I’m more comfortable befriending the other aunties working in the supermarkets than a few scholarship recipients I know of. They are just so down to earth people. Sorry mates. Lastly, being an odd-jobber is one of the easiest jobs in the world. It requires very little effort except for the fact that you may be required to stand for long hours in a particular spot but hey, what’s the handsome salary for?

            I’ve made my point now about being an odd-jobber. If you’re someone who lives by the saying ‘work smart, not hard’, I’ll strongly suggest that you go look out for these part-time jobs instead. Where? Well, Google it! You’ll probably feel shy when you start your first job. I mean there’s always that ‘youth pride’ which is hard to swallow. You might even be paranoid as to what other might feel about you especially your friends when you wear that ridiculous promoter outfit. I know how it feels like but never let how others feel about you to influence you. In fact, I wouldn’t mind if my friends or acquaintances saw me because they’ll go like, “Hey, isn’t that Eugene, the guy who has a Sime Darby scholarship and a would-be future lawyer in three years time?” Yes, the peculiar look on their faces is just - priceless. Awesomeness.

 Event Coordinator in a Concert

Mascot. RM60 for 1/2 hour.

Typical Promoter