THE CALIBRE OF NAJIB'S CABINET: From ‘whacking’ to ‘trigger-happy’ politicians

A quick search of online dictionaries for the meaning of ‘whacking’ will show that it is NOT a positive word.

For example, Urban Dictionary describes the word as:

1. adjective; appalling in nature, unconventional.

2. verb; to strike one with the hand or fist.

3. verb; to assassinate.

Nowhere does it even suggest that the word can come from someone with a fine culture.

Therefore, for Malaysian Culture and Tourism Minister, Nazri Abdul Aziz (whom I have always admired for being outspoken), to use such a word against the Crown Prince of Johor is anything but acceptable to both the Malay culture and as seen at large from the acceptable norms in the Malaysian context.

The only line of defence that Nazri may have is that he had used the word ‘whack’ to mean verbal attack on Tunku Ismail Sultan Ibrahim, and even then, there could be some more suitable words to convey his meaning.

To say that he was only defending Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak is simply making the situation worse, because the crown prince or the sultan have minds of his own, and to comment on current affairs makes perfect sense to me.

Pundits may argue that this is against the British norms, but my point is, do we want a ruler who speaks out for his people, or do we want a ruler who is being seen as the rubber stamp for any elected government? I may be wrong, but I prefer one who will speak up on behalf of the people.

This, in fact, should be the role of the constitutional monarch. They should serve as the voice of conscience for the nation.

They have to be the pillar of justice in this country and where there appears to be a miscarriage of justice, or apparently a misrepresentation by the government of the day, the monarchs should see it as their role to speak up on behalf of the rakyat.

Only a ruler who is close to the people will be able to do this. For this, I have to salute Tunku Ismail, because there are not many monarchs or members of the royal family who are willing to stick out their necks to speak up for the rakyat.

Hopefully, we will see a new breed of members of the royal family in the likes of Tunku Ismail, who would not take things for granted that because they are paid an allowance, they will remain oblivious of what is happening in the country.

Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream. There can only be true peace, harmony and prosperity when the ruler stands for justice and righteousness. This should be the role played by non-partisan monarchs.

A fellow progressive thinker like Wan Saiful Wan Jan, chief executive officer of the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (Ideas), whom I also admire, should have checked at least the Oxford Dictionary before he even made such a statement in public, blaming those with a poor command of the English language, and supported Nazri for using “the word correctly to describe the reality of the world of politics”.

You can whack a dog, and even these days, such a word is no longer politically correct, but to whack the son of the sultan, it is atrocious! I pray that Tunku Ismail will forgive Nazri for his uncultured manner of speaking for once, but we cannot afford to allow this to happen even with a security guard, what more to a crown prince of a state.

And, less tolerable is for another lawmaker from Kinabatangan to be, presumably, ‘trigger-happy’ when a group of women turned up at his house.

Bung Moktar’s dilemma

Bung Moktar Radin is infamous for his sexist remarks, which in my opinion, bring shame to both his party and the constituency that he represents.

From comments like ‘leak’, Bung’s latest verbal diarrhea which has brought him and his party into further disrepute, was this one-line statement: “Luckily, I was not there. Had I been there, people may have died. Don’t challenge me.”

If even a member of the royal family can welcome the ‘challenge’ from Nazri, why is it that Bung cannot accept the ‘challenge’ from women?

I wonder what the women and family development minister has to say about the behaviour of her fellow lawmaker? Or is there a cabinet minister looking after the affairs of women?

True that the protesters should not have appeared in front of Bung’s house, but for a lawmaker to issue a death threat is simply uncalled for. It is unbecoming for an elected representative to even utter the word.

If Bung was referring to using his pistol, then the inspector-general of Police should not stand by the side and watch a murder happening; instead, Bung’s pistol should be confiscated immediately. If the IGP fails to do this, will Najib then, as the prime minister, show his leadership by example by nipping the problem in the bud and instruct the IGP to do what is right? Bung should not be allowed to carry any weapon, with his unsound frame of mind.

Bung can of course hire bodyguards for his own protection, in case the women in this country overwhelm him, but he should not be carrying any weapon with him. Issuing a death threat is a serious matter and I say it again - Bung, being a member of the August House, should know that he cannot afford to utter such a word in public.

With these two examples and no apparent actions taken by the prime minister himself, as a citizen of this country, I wonder what we have become as a nation. If we continue to allow such behaviour to be expressed without being condemned, as a nation, we may be going to the dogs.

Where will Malaysia be in 20 years’ time because our ‘not knowing right from wrong’ politicians are allowed to dominate the news?

Their influence, for good or for worse, will affect the younger generation of Malaysians if they are allowed to get away with it, while others from the opposition would have been thrown into prison by now. - M'kini