No tradition without representation

Still, though some ugly ethno-nationalist authoritarians hate our Westminster system (one called democracy a “cancer”), the concepts of elections and representation are embedded in our culture. 

by Tunku ‘Abidin Muhriz.  A version of this article was published in The Malay Mail 5 July 2013

I nipped down to the Dewan Rakyat this week and caught a glimpse of the parliamentary action that has been widely reported in the newspapers. The foyer around the chamber was buzzing with special officers and interns brisk-walking, hands clutching mobile devices and their bosses’ bags, hoping that their efforts will make some difference to the country, or at least, enjoying feeling important in the corridors of power. I always gaze up to the portraits of long-forgotten Dewan Ra’ayat [sic] speakers and Dewan Negara presidents, who in their copious wigs oversaw debates in impeccable English enriched by witty retorts.

Reading the Hansard of the sixties it seems impossible that our august house could descend to a level where an MP (or newspaper) could ask a Malaysian citizen to leave the country because of a difference of opinion (or misreporting of opinions). Unfortunately this does now happen; tragically we are unsurprised by it, so routine it has become. Though the general election ejected some thugs, remnants of ugly ethno-nationalist authoritarianism continue to stain the Dewan Rakyat’s plush chairs. Thankfully (and finally), now that the election is over, there are at least some sensible voices from coalition partners condemning these immature comments.

One of those asked to leave the country was Tony Pua, who along with Dato’ Saifuddin Abdullah kindly launched my latest compilation of uncensored and unabridged articles (Roaming Beyond the Fence, RM39.90 at most bookstores!) on Sunday. I read some excerpts from the book to ignite discussion on issues that will be hotly contested in the next few years, including English-medium schools, subsidies and a lack of trust in national institutions. Their acceptance of the fact that patriotic Malaysians can have different views on policy issues is something that should be emulated by all parliamentarians.

Indeed we have already seen disagreement on issues even amongst the BN ranks at this early stage of the parliamentary sitting. I particularly enjoyed Kalabakan MP Datuk Abdul Ghapur Salleh stating matter-of-factly that, if faced with armed intruders at home, he would “ambik shotgun dan terus tembak”. He was arguing that the response to the invasion of Lahad Datu was too slow and too tepid – a view that seemed to have cross-party support.

More current is the opposition from two ministers to a clause of the Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Bill 2013 that would allow the unilateral conversion of children to Islam. Theoretically, such open dissent should never happen in cabinet government, in which every minister is supposed to support the government in public (or resign, as Dato’ Zaid Ibrahim did on the ISA). While questions are raised about the extent of discussion within the cabinet on such important measures, the growing momentum of opposition to a controversial, potentially abused piece of legislation will be welcomed by many quarters. (Still, even if it goes through, matters pertaining to Islam remain decentralised to the states, so this law would only apply in the Federal Territories.)

The doctrine of cabinet collective responsibility notwithstanding, the expressing of independent views from our politicians is a good thing. Our electoral system assumes that MPs are individuals who primarily represent their constituents. The phrase “political party” does not appear once in our Federal Constitution, and the appointments of Prime Minister, Menteris Besar or Chief Ministers are based on the likely support of a majority of individuals in the legislature regardless of party. This may become extremely important in light of the upcoming by-election in Terengganu.

As we have seen though, most Malaysians seem to vote more according to the party logo than the individual: when coupled with undemocratic means of candidate selection, it means good people end up being defeated and bad people end up continuing the stain the plush chairs.

Still, though some ugly ethno-nationalist authoritarians hate our Westminster system (one called democracy a “cancer”), the concepts of elections and representation are embedded in our culture.

On Tuesday the 18th Penghulu Luak of Gunung Pasir was formally introduced to the Yang di-Pertuan Besar at Istana Besar Seri Menanti. As per the adat, he was elected in a three-stage process after the demise of the previous penghulu (chieftain) by the lembaga (headmen) of Gunung Pasir, out of the Tanah Datar clan (not the Seri Lemak Minangkabau clan as misreported by a certain newspaper apparently ignorant of the fact that membership of a suku (clan) is matrilineal).

Each of the five luaks (districts) in the Tanah Mengandung – constituent parts of Negeri Sembilan which do not have an Undang – have their own histories and customs, but each penghulu is charged with upholding the democratic adat and representing their kinsfolk to the sovereign institution. Sounds familiar, no?

- – -

Tunku ‘Abidin Muhriz is the president of IDEAS