Mariam Mokhtar | Oct 17, 2011
Malaysiakini

The cultural identity of modern Malaysia is like an artist’s palette, a colourful blend of people from different backgrounds, origins, traditions, culture and faiths. There is no denying that our rulers helped shaped the country’s social and historical development. They symbolise unity, pride and national identity.

But our royalty cannot escape living in a goldfish bowl.

If our public institutions are subject to modernisation, evaluation and reform, why can’t we discuss this particular institution – the royal institution?

Why are we perceived as enemies of the state just because we point out the obvious but unspoken facts? Why do intellectually challenged flunkies, who refuse to be dragged into the 21st century, prevent intelligent discourse about the Malay rulers?

Stopping healthy interaction will strain relationships between the rakyat and the monarchy. Hence, this discussion is long overdue.

The royalty cannot dispense with the scrutiny of a rakyat that exacts high standards from them. The royalty must learn to cope in a modern world where the feudal system, class distinctions and other forms of discrimination are outdated.

When the constitutional law expert Abdul Aziz Bari opined that Malay Rulers should be publicly scrutinised, the Malay daily, Utusan Malaysia, slammed him for being “disrespectful”.

Abdul Aziz had said the role played by the sultan in the Selangor Islamic Affairs Department (Jais) raid on the Damansara Utama Methodist Church (DUMC) dinner was “unconventional” and that taxpayers had every right to judge how their rulers executed their constitutional powers.

He said, “Under the Sedition Act 1948, it is fine to criticise the rulers so long as it does not advocate the abolition of the institution (of monarchy).”

Mindful of the political implications, the self-styled defender of the faith, Senator Ezam Mohd Noor joined Utusan in condemning Abdul Aziz Bari and also Malaysiakini, for publishing his remarks. He lodged a police report for both to be investigated under the Sedition Act because they threatened national security with their incitement to “hate royals”.

Ezam is a career politician who makes a living out of leap-frogging from one political party to another (1998, 2007 and 2008). His less than perfect credentials include waging jihad against Malaysiakini and Malaysian Insider, when he threatened to torch their offices for their “anti-Jais stance”.

His selective amnesia conveniently ignored former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s dressing-down of the sultans in 1993, when practically all in Umno were unanimous about curbing the powers of our royalty.

Mahathir poses as a Malay and in his typical divisive fashion, clipped the wings of the sultans then. But today, Mahathir himself castigated Abdul Aziz for his comments about the Jais raid.

Mahathir should recall the speech he made at the Dewan Rakyat in February 1993, when he publicly humiliated the nation’s nine rulers for their various infractions, before stripping them of their powers.

That didn’t stop Kinabatangan MP Bung Mokhtar Radin, the husband of Zizie Ezette, joining in the rebuke of Malaysiakini and Abdul Aziz.

Bung Mokhtar said, “Freedom of speech is allowed among academics but he (Abdul Aziz) made his criticism at the wrong time and place, he is not a constitutional expert, just an expert at twisting facts.”

Few will forget how this controversial MP issued several denials, that his new hair-cut, dyed hair and sporty look, was because he was courting a film starlet.

Bung didn’t mind twisting the definition of marriage when he broke the law by committing polygamy. He subsequently twisted the syariah ruling and escaped with a rap on the knuckles and a minimal fine.

Nevertheless, the DUMC decree was not the only “unconventional” royal incident.

The long-term repercussions of the Perak debacle of 2008 have left deep scars in the psyche of Malaysians. Other allegations of royal misdeeds, which are rarely reported in Malaysia, have been chronicled elsewhere and make disturbing reading.

Recently, within a fortnight of each other, two sultans were offended by the actions or remarks of third parties.

Last month, the sultan of Johor was offended when Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng alleged, during a private conversation at a private function, that “a Singaporean was likely to get kidnapped in Johor, and that in comparison, Penang was more attractive for travel and business”.

Stifling Malay freedom of thought and expression

The sultan said, “Yes, I was offended when I got to know about that statement, but I don’t want to react, because as a ruler, I shouldn’t be dragged into politics.”

Johor-born Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin, milked the predicament facing Lim for all its worth and urged Lim to apologise for being “irresponsible”. Muhyiddin claimed that whenever he was overseas, he refrained from ridiculing opposition-led states.

Lim has since apologised for offending the sultan but said that he would neither deny nor confirm the allegations, to prevent further misquotes.

Last week, the sultan of Selangor issued a press statement about the Jais raid on the DUMC, which said that no one would be prosecuted because of lack of evidence. He also said that he was “….gravely concerned and extremely offended by the attempts of certain parties to weaken the faith and belief of Muslims…”

Many questions remain unanswered. Why should Muslims at the dinner be counselled if there was no evidence of proselytising? If there were attempts to proselytise, shouldn’t the offenders be punished? What about the legality of the Jais raid?

It appears that a ‘sticking plaster’ was used to patch up the deep wound that this farce exposed and Malaysians on both sides of the religious divide are offended. Who will deliver the apology?

On a wider scale, the rakyat is ‘offended’ when the authorities neglect corruption, crime, injustice, ill-treatment of women, nepotism, cronyism and the bumbling service given by the bloated bureaucracy.

At a forum called “Challenges for Penang to become the Intellectual Hub of the Region”, former Perlis mufti Mohd Asri Zainal Abidin blamed “restrictions imposed by the authorities” for stifling Malay freedom of thought and expression.

He said “The Malays are influenced by feudal values of the past… these values include loyalty to the King. I am not saying monarchy is wrong. But the attitude of ampu (brown nosing/apple polishing) towards political leaders and royalty contribute to this restriction (on intellectual development)”.

Ariffin Omar, a history lecturer at the Malaysian Defence University, agreed that the Malays lacked cultural and political freedom, and their underdeveloped economic status stifled their intellectual development.

Ariffin said, “But what happens here is that when you speak your mind, you are persecuted, a traitor of the nation. Why is there no maturity in politics?

“When will people start to think critically and debate on important issues and find solutions to address the problems of the community?”

Ariffin has probably noticed that we are slowly opening up our minds and it is Umno/BN and the rulers, who need to be mature and stop calling us traitors.

Lesser royals, who wish to remain anonymous, have intimated that they are disturbed by the abuse of power by officials in the corridors of the palace.

So it appears everyone is at least united by one thing: Fear.

Fear silences the majority from speaking the obvious. Fear of losing a way of life stops the authorities from allowing the Malays to progress intellectually.

Ariffin correctly surmised, “It is not the government but the people who have the power to determine the future of the country.”

——————————————————————————–

MARIAM MOKHTAR is a non-conformist traditionalist from Perak, a bucket chemist and an armchair eco-warrior. In ‘real-speak’, this translates into that she comes from Ipoh, values change but respects culture, is a petroleum chemist and also an environmental pollution-control scientist.