End race-based parties, says Ku Li

This call by Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah as reported by the Malaysian Insider may not see immediate progress. But, it is a necessary reminder to all Malaysians.

We seem to have forgotten that since 1957, the call has always been for national unity and community harmony.

We need for common space where Malaysians have a chance to interact with each other regardless of race or religion.

Having colour blind political parties is a necessary precondition.

Dr M wants PM powers to be reduced

I read the the Malaysian Insider's reported expiation by Dr M with a deep and resigned *sigh*. The man now says that the Prime Minister's position contains "too much power".

In our own Malaysian history, we have had anecdotal evidence from the late Professor Hugh Hickling about a conversation he had with Tun Abdul Razak on the Internal Security Act. Hickling, who was the person tasked with drafting the ISA, said that he had a moment to raise his concerns with Tun Razak about the sweeping powers of preventive detention to be written into the legislation. In response, Tun Razak purportedly told Hickling not to worry because he, Tun Razak, knew where the boundaries were.....

Preventive detention under the edifice of ISA was used with degrees of controversy by Tun Razak's successors.

This lesson is never learnt.

During his long and distinguished time as Prime Minister, Dr M had amassed tremendous powers in the Prime Minister's Office. During that time, Dr M was often more presidential than prime ministerial in his approach to public office. 

Of course, the man knew where the boundaries were.....

Recently, Dr M, who has taken the new guise of street fighter extraordinaire, has reminded us of Lord Acton's much maligned dictum that, "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely".

I have been wondering whether this is some form of karma in Dr M's odyssey.

The shitty thing is that if this is, indeed, Dr M's odyssey, then, we idiot Malaysians are the unfortunate souls who happen to be in the rickety vessel; being tossed, turned and buffeted until we are blue in the face and nauseated. 

As the cotton farming slaves used to say in the pre-Civil War American South, "Ain't nothin' we can do about that".

Or, is there?

Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah

I wrote a blog post on 24 July 2009 that earned me a private chat with Tengku Razaleigh. In recent weeks events have taken a turn that many Malaysians hope, will lead to a near unanimous cry of support for Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah to restore Malaysia to its roots and ideals as envisioned by our Founding Fathers at the time of Merdeka. I set out below the blog post which was originally posted here-

I feel compelled to delve a little deeper into the motivations of Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah in the context of the current swirl of political and institutional turmoil in Malaysia. The political turmoil is obvious to all.

Less so, is the institutional turmoil.

Who will guard the guards themselves?
Before 1987 (a year I seem to re-visit constantly as the zeroth point from which the timeline of Malaysia's current political and institutional turmoil commences), the no-brainer principle was that Malaysia's Federal Constitution contained (I say it in the past tense in light of recent mind-numbing judicial pronouncements from the Federal Court) features of the separation of powers doctrine where the Executive branch of government would be audited by the Legislature and, if there is any legal action, by the Judiciary.

Tunku Abdul Rahman accepted this as did Tun Abdul Razak and Tun Hussein Onn. All three gentlemen read law in England (not that the jurisdiction nor geography is of any relevance in the context of this point but, that the knowledge and skills acquired are).

Their successors have taken a different view. Whether knowledge and understanding of the law should have any bearing on this attitudinal shift is moot. I just like to highlight this.

The issue of institutional turmoil is very real. The MACC's handling of Teoh Beng Hock is the most recent and, glaring example.

So, quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who will guard the guards themselves?

If the Legislature can no longer audit the Executive and, if there is scepticism whether the Judiciary has the necessary independence on issues involving Executive action, then, what is left in the context of orderly constitutional government?

It is no wonder that new Malaysian political leaders have exhibited less and less respect for Malaysia's constitutional institutions in the past two decades.

Where do we go from here?

This is the issue that haunts Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah. It is an issue that haunts me. It is an issue that should haunt all Malaysians.

Trying to understand Ku Li
I have never met Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah. But, I believe his actions in forming Semangat '46; his subsequent return to UMNO; and, his refusal to accept Zaid Ibrahim's invitation, can be considered in other ways.

Many Malaysians, particularly those that are partisan with Pakatan Rakyat are exasperated with Tengku Razaleigh's decision to rebuff Zaid's invitation. Many have said that Tengku Razaleigh is not relevant anyway or, that he, too, carries political baggage. That, with the greatest of respect, is nonsense and, an unfair trivialisation of Tengku Razaleigh's continued importance within Malaysia's polity.

In the hotchpot of Malaysia the citizenry practises a Babel-like habit of talking at cross-purposes. This is not so much due to multi-lingualism but, more to do with endless politicking and political spin.

In such a milieu, many of us are thankful when a respected personage in the form of a Sultan, a political leader or, eminent Malaysian, makes a timely public statement that is sensible and wise and, has the effect of soothing ruffled feathers and, injecting a dose of wise perspective on a issue that threatens to tear the socio-political fabric.

For me, Tengku Razaleigh is one such person.

His political stance is always principled. But his motivations can be exasperatingly enigmatic to many.

After writing the previous post my mind wandered back to Adlai Stevenson whose political position in the raucous American political process, in this case the Democratic Presidential Primary of 1959, was at issue.

The Adlai Stevenson parallel
Stevenson was the Democratic Presidential Candidate in 1952 and 1956. In both attempts he lost to the Republican Party's Dwight Eisenhower.

Despite two debilitating defeats, Stevenson was a much-respected and popular leader within the Democratic Party. It also helped tremendously that the grande dame of the Democrats, Eleanor Roosevelt, the widow of Franklin D. Roosevelt, was an overt supporter of Stevenson's. This was the case in 1959, when the Democratic Primaries was in full swing and approaching its climax in the Los Angeles Democratic Convention.

Stevenson had hardly campaigned throughout the Primaries. But, party rules permitted members to draft a candidate who would be eligible for contention as a candidate of the party without having to undergo the bruising battles in the Primaries.

To borrow the phrase from my previous post, the eager politician in this story was John F Kennedy. Stevenson was the reluctant politician.

Kennedy's political machine was understandably alarmed at the prospect of a last-minute draft candidate in the form of Stevenson that threatened to undo and destroy more than four years of tremendous groundwork.

Everyone knows that Kennedy took the Democratic nomination and went on to defeat Richard Nixon in what was the slimmest majority ever for a presidential contest...until Bush versus Gore in 2000.

Where I'm leading to after the necessary contextual digression, is this insightful passage in a seminal book on American politics, The Making of the President 1960 by one of the best biographical-journalist-author that I have come across, Theodore H. White. White's passage describes the mindset of Stevenson in the context of American public life and its politics:

If this happy and placid man gave political calculators an impression of total schizophrenia, the reason was a simple one - Adlai Stevenson was and, I believe, remains torn in attitude to the two great systems of power that mesh in the unity of the American Presidency. Stevenson's attitude to public affairs approaches a nobility rarely encountered in the political system of any country; but his attitude to politics - the grubby, rooty politics of noise and deals and cruelties and chicaneries - is one of contempt. Yet public affairs and politics are linked as are love and sex. Stevenson's attitude to politics has always seemed that of a man who believes love is the most ennobling of human emotions while the mechanics of sex are dirty and squalid.

This seemed to be the quality of his reflections. "Deep down," said his closest friend during the winter months of 1959-1960, "he wants it. But he wants the Convention to come to him, he doesn't want to go to the Convention." 

It is my fervent hope that the stars will align themselves in favour of the ascendancy of Tengku Razaleigh to lead Malaysia.

If ever there was a need to transform Malaysia, now is the time. 

This feeling that many Malaysians have may best be expressed in an extract of Tennyson's epic poem, Ulysses-

Tho' much is taken, much abides; and tho' 

We are not now that strength which in old days 

Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are; 

One equal temper of heroic hearts, 

Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will 

To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

IGP needs to dial it down

One of the wise words that came from a judge in a singing competition somewhere in East Asia to a contestant seems appropriate to be directed at Malaysia's Inspector-General of Police. The judge said simply, "Less is more".

I have always had a healthy respect for our men in blue. Although many may have different experiences, I have found the Royal Malaysian Police to be reasonably responsive when I made the occasional calls to report on vagrants and their furtive presence in my neighbourhood.

I also count a few men in officer rank as friends.

The IGP has been so combative in directly engaging all manner of issues with his detractors that he appears to be providing some form of distraction, often not positive, for the Malaysian public. 

In publicly responding to issues spat out by detractors or, any issue, I fear the IGP is falling into the trap of becoming a participant in Malaysia's raucous political space. This is not good.

Responses and pronouncements made by the IGP via social media tools may, at first blush, appear to project an image of a senior law enforcement officer having the dexterity of flowing with the times.

However, the IGP should pause and consider what damage of perception he is doing to Malaysia's highly stable and highly respected DUE PROCESS as enshrined in all our laws.

The IGP needs to realise that the Royal Malaysian Police, being a law enforcement agency, is part of the due process of law in Malaysia.

As such, the IGP should, MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, keep a dignified silence and allow a more orderly and, I emphasise, LESS PERSONAL response to criticism directed at his post or, at the Royal Malaysian Police or, any issues of public importance.

I am calling for the IGP to maintain the dignity of the position. 

Malaysians are tired of having to cringe every time our most senior law enforcement officer rolls up his sleeves and puts on verbal and written knuckle dusters in responding to negative comments.

And, I also wish to point out that there are very good and compelling reasons why there is a good market for well trained Publicity Officers, Public Relations Officers and Communications Officers. The IGP should discuss how to respond with fellow officers with such training before responding....and also do some counting first...one Mississippi...two Mississippi....three Mississippi...four Mississippi....