Najib must stop divide-and-rule policies – Ravinder Singh

Terlangsung perahu boleh balik,

Terlangsung cakap ta’boleh balik.

Where is the integrity or credibility of a person who verbally makes a strong statement on a sensitive  issue when addressing one group of people one day, and two days later makes another statement non-verbally on his Facebook page on the same issue that is diametrically opposite of the first? 

This can be expected of a mentally unsound person, but when this is done by the chief executive of the country, what should one make of it?

The speech reader cannot blame it on the speech writers as the words that are put in the reader’s mouth by the writers become the words of the reader when he pronounces them. By the principle of vicarious liability, he becomes liable for what he says as he adopts those words as his own though reading what is written by somebody else. 

If the text of the speech is only handed to the reader when he gets to the podium, for whatever reason, then it is the reader’s fault for not having demanded that it be handed to him well before that for a vetting by him and amendments by him if necessary as ultimately he is responsible for what he reads out as his own words.

It is unbelievable that not only is the actual phrasing of the prime minister’s speech outsourced, but even the message of the speech is outsourced to God knows who. I wonder how many prime ministers and presidents do this.

So, the chief executive puts 100% trust in the "good" and "moral" sense of the speechwriter(s) to put proper words into his mouth at the very last minute, only to regret later (?) and having to swallow the humble pie and do some damage control with unspoken words of his own that are of a different tone?

Datuk Seri Najib Razak's statement in Kuantan that “Islam is threatened by an ideology which can be termed as "human rights-ism", which he said was “like a new ‘religion’ growing rapidly inside and outside the country”, itself sounds anti-Islamic for as far as I know Islam does not deny anyone his human rights. The ulama, Jais, Jakim, Mais, etc. can correct me if I am wrong.

For example, if I don’t want to be a Muslim, can Islam deny me my right? According to bigoted parties like Perkasa, Isma, Ridhuan Tee and their ilk, I don’t seem to have that right if I want to continue staying in Malaysia, although I was born here and have lived here all my life. For the prime minister to give encouragement to these bigots to carry on their agenda does not give me encouragement that he is also my prime minister, as was proclaimed by him.

I believe using religion for political gains is not permitted by Islam. I don’t see non-Muslim parties doing this. So can we say that they are practising Islamic values?

If the PM really regretted his statement about Islam being threatened by human rights, he should have called a press conference to say so. There is a big difference between standing in front of a thousand people and saying something, and writing some words on Facebook to "retract" the offending words.  

At least, can we expect that if the PM is the PM of all Malaysians, not only will he stop making statements that hurt unity of the various ethnic groups that have lived peacefully for ages, but that he will also stop all civil servants and so-called self-appointed defenders of the faith from driving wedges between the peoples of diverse racial and religious backgrounds who did not see such bigotry until the Barisan Nasional lost its two-thirds majority.

* Ravinder Singh reads The Malaysian Insider.