Royalty issue: Who is more credible - Dr M or Aziz Bari?

Never trust UMNO when they start talking about the Monarchy in Malaysia. Nor can we ever trust Mahathir Mohamad when it comes to commenting on the royals. That the former prime minister came out to chide Prof Aziz Bari for being “kurang ajar” or rude when the law lecturer remarked that Royalty were not above criticism, speaks volumes about Mahathir's propensity to forget his own deeds, misdeeds and history.

The fact that the International Islamic University or UIA thought it proper to suspend Aziz Bari also underscores the poor and lowly view the Barisan Nasional government has of the academicians in Malaysia. They seem to think the academia exists to rubber stamp their way of thought, their policies and politics. Academicians are only academics if and only when they tell the version of the story that BN and UMNO subscribe to.They make no bones about putting on the screws to force the managements of the universities to bow to their will.

Brain drain has nothing to do with loyalty

But this goes against the very ethos of what an academic should do. Academics are trained to look at subjects objectively and rationally. And one can agree to disagree in academia.This is also supposed to be possible in a democracy, so it looks like the ruling politicians in Malaysia do not practise much of a democracy at all.

For sure, UMNO does not subscribe to this line of thought. Instead, UMNO chooses to enforce their strangle hold on all forms and manner of free thinking in the country. How can Malaysia ever be a world beater when groups like UMNO and BN leech the intellectuals here of their right to think. Small wonder that many Malaysian geniuses choose to serve everywhere else except their motherland.

It is also not a question of loyalty as UMNO loves to accuse those who voice opinions that do not favour their party, but rather the opportunity to think is curtailed - thus dooming the vibrancy and future of the nation.

Spitting in the wind

And to have Mahathir comment on the need to be respectful to the Royals is akin to spitting into the wind.

In 1983, UMNO under the leadership of Mahathir Mohamad took on Malaysia’s royalty, the first of many battles. He stepped forward to introduce amendments to the constitution that would limit the Agong’s authority over Parliament. The Agong would have to assent to a bill within 15 days of being passed and most importantly the amendments also included transferring the power to declare a state of emergency from the Agong to the Prime Minister.

The Agong refused to bend to Mahathir’s wishes and His Highness was supported by the Sultans, conservative UMNO politicians, a large minority of the Malay community and an even larger number from the Chinese community. But Mahathir had the press on his side and took to the streets and organised mass rallies to show that public support was behind him. Ironic that none of these street rallies were deemed illegal as the July 9 Bersih rally for free and fair polls was, nor were they deemed a threat to national security or damaging to the country’s economy.

After five months, the two sides reach a compromised with the power to declare emergency still in the Agong’s hands but if a bill was not assented to by the Agong, it would be returned to Parliament which meant that parliament could over-ride the Agong’s veto.

Mahathir became the uncrowned 'King'

In his second decade in office, Mahathir had again found himself battling Malaysia's royalty.

In 1992, Sultan Iskandar's son, a representative hockey player, was suspended from competition for five years for assaulting an opponent. Sultan Iskandar retaliated by pulling all Johor hockey teams out of national competitions. When his decision was criticised by a local coach, Sultan Iskandar ordered him to his palace and promptly had the coach beaten.

The federal parliament unanimously censured Sultan Iskandar, and Mahathir leapt at the opportunity to remove the constitutional protection of the Sultans from civil and criminal suit.

The press backed Mahathir and, in an unprecedented action, began airing allegations of misconduct by members of Malaysia's royal families. As the press revealed examples of the Rulers' extravagant wealth, Mahathir resolved to cut financial support to royal households. With the press and the government pitted against them, the Sultans capitulated to the government's proposals. Their powers to deny assent to bills were limited by further constitutional amendments passed in 1994 and with this Mahathir had become the country's "uncrowned king".

UIA, a university that does not know how to think?

UMNO under the leadership of Mahathir Mohamad had effectively gained control over the royals, imposing their grip on the authority of the Agong.

This is UMNO’s form of respect to the royals in Malaysia. We are not just talking about one sultan for UMNO dared to take on the Agong and collectively take a shot at all the royals. Compare this to Aziz Bari’s comment of the Sultan of Selangor’s decision and one can clearly see the double standards practiced in the way Malaysia hands out justice.

Shame on UIA for buckling under the pressure of politicians. If UMNO can use the excuse that its Bukit Gelugor chief Dr Novandri Hasan Basri's blog comments attacking Lim Guan Eng's son “are only his personal view”, then why can’t UIA too say that the comments of Aziz Bari were “the personal views” of the academician?

Would this not show that UIA, as an academic institution, subscribes to the notion that all can learn and all are allowed to question and through questioning, expand their knowledge?

Malaysia Chronicle