I read with great relief the decision by Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad to relinquish the post of education minister in adherence to Pakatan Harapan’s GE 14 manifesto.
This was a politically astute, and more importantly, morally sound decision.
The journey to this decision however, was fraught with a number of statements and turns that raised serious warning flags regarding the habits and integrity of this new era of leadership.
These were especially worrying because they came from two of the understandably most beloved and highly regarded leaders of the new political order.
While the point is now moot, the path we nearly went down was alarming enough to warrant some attention.
A close look
In the wake of accusations that Harapan was not abiding by its manifesto when it was announced that Mahathir was to become education minister, both PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim and DAP veteran Lim Kit Siang released statements.
Let’s take a close look at these statements, as reported in the press.
The Star quoted Anwar as saying yesterday, “I think that doesn’t go contrary (to the manifesto). To my understanding, the prime minister is not a portfolio.
“The prime minister manages the country generally, so does the deputy prime minister (Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail). These are not portfolios.”
He reportedly emphasised that the main point was that the prime minister does not also assume the post of finance minister.
Meanwhile, Lim said in a statement: “What was made very clear at the various Pakatan Harapan ceramah throughout the country was the institutional reforms on term limit for the Prime Minister and to ensure that the Prime Minister cannot hold the Finance Minister portfolio.
“The Pakatan Harapan Manifesto’s ‘Promise 12: Limit the prime minister’s term of office and restructure the Prime Minister’s Department’ states: ‘The prime minister will not simultaneously hold other ministerial posts, especially the post of minister of finance.’
“This is not very happily worded, open to different construction. There is an absolute prohibition on the Prime Minister holding the post of Ministry of Finance, which is not applicable to other ministries.
“For this reason, Mahathir’s helming of education ministry does not violate the letter and spirit of Pakatan Harapan manifesto.”
How do we measure these two statements?
Is the language ambiguous?
Sometimes, language is ambiguous. An example may be the law that disqualifies anyone who has been fined more than RM 2,000 in a criminal conviction to contest in the elections. Depending on the wording of the law, it may be ambiguous as to whether someone who has been fined exactly RM 2,000 is in fact eligible or not to contest.
Are we facing a similar case here?
Lim helpfully quotes exactly what is written in the Harapan manifesto for GE14, verbatim:
“The prime minister will not simultaneously hold other ministerial posts, especially the post of the minister of finance.”
I am not a lawyer, but I will humbly say that my understanding of the English language is more than sufficient to state that this sentence is not in fact in any way ambiguous.
Lim’s statements are the most forceful, so let us examine them first. Which part of this sentence from the manifesto suggests “an absolute prohibition on the prime minister holding the post of Ministry of Finance, which is not applicable to other ministries”?
We can examine two simple statements: One, “The prime minister will not simultaneously hold other ministerial posts”; and two, “The prime minister is holding the post of the minister of education.”
The second sentence is definitely true, and I cannot for the life of me see how the second sentence is not contrary to the first sentence.
So how can Anwar justify saying, “I think that doesn’t go contrary (to the manifesto)”?
Two and two is four
Malaysiakini editor-in-chief Steven Gan wrote an impassioned piece in the wake of the anti-fake news law a few weeks ago, where he quoted George Orwell:
“The torturer says to Winston: “You are a slow learner, Winston."
"How can I help it? How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane.”
While the spirit of the manifesto is debatable, I believe there is no question whatsoever that the letter had been violated - unless of course, we are all being asked (ala 1984) to turn whatever we understand of words and letters completely upside down.
It usually starts with the little lies
Of all the things that have happened in the last week, this by far has made me the most uneasy.
To use a controversial example, I would go so far as to say that it is this type of obfuscation that eventually leads to lies like “The RM 2.6 billion was a donation from a Saudi royal family.”
This may sound like an exaggeration, but I truly believe that it starts with the little lies, and twisting and turning of words.
Malaysians, more than most, know exactly what it is like to be lied to by people in power on a daily basis; what it’s like to be force-fed garbage, and be expected to compliment the taste.
I am reminded of the lawyer who suggested that DAP political aide Teoh Beng Hock strangled himself, of former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak’s wife Rosmah Mansor saying that her riches are the result of a lifetime of saving habits, and so on.
I believe that neither Anwar nor Lim truly believed that the manifesto was not violated.
What the primary cause for concern is how they chose to face this problem. If obfuscation and spin are to be the weapons of choice, then it is only a matter of time before the small lies become big ones.
Will feudal politics continue to thrive?
In feudal politics, the leader is always right, no matter what. The leader, is in fact the fount of truth and justice, in that whatever he or she says is, ipso facto, true and just. This feudal model was prevalent in all levels of BN politics.
Feudal politics are full of foot soldiers, ready to tear you apart for being the least bit critical of their beloved leaders, whatever the reason.
In progressive politics, we laud a leader for doing and saying what is right, just and principled - for example, when they reverse a decision that would have been unprincipled.
We also object respectfully when they do or say something that is wrong or untrue - for example, when there is an attempt to obfuscate, twist and spin words written in simple, straightforward, black-and-white language.
I think we should all avoid the trap of becoming a moralising, armchair critic, forever on a high horse exercising self-righteous judgement.
That said, if the very top new leaders in the country are trying to tell us that two and two is five in their very first week in power, then surely it is our duty to say: No, it is four.
To hear the very forefront of our new political leadership barely a week in power begin to sell unbelievable spin the same way Najib or former transport minister Liow Tiong Lai would is nothing short of heartbreaking.
Alternative approaches
I worked on the very first shared Pakatan Rakyat document - a common platform, that very much resembled a manifesto.
That process was quite haphazard, and did not really represent some sort of comprehensive integration of all the political views of each party, hashed out in a systematic and thorough manner.
It was more like a few individuals coming up with ideas and drafts on their own, going through only the most basic of vetting processes.
Not being involved this year, I can’t say whether it was the same, but in my experience, the top leadership don’t pay a lot of close attention to the details (which would account for the confusion surrounding the initial decision and announcement).
Going against what you have stated in your manifesto is bad - there’s no question about that.
That said, if you really believe that such a departure is necessary in order to adapt to different and changing realities, and you can justify how doing so works for the betterment of the country - I believe people can accept such adjustments.
If for example, Mahathir wanted to hold the education ministry until Anwar becomes an MP so that he can transfer the portfolio to him then, then just say so. There’s no need to hide.
Of course, it also helps if all the top political leaders are on the same page from the get-go, so we do not have the somewhat embarrassing situation of Lim and Anwar going all out to defend the decision, only to have it almost instantly reversed.
Sixty years of BN rule has been predicated essentially on Malaysians being too stupid or too meek to challenge blatant lies told to their faces. In less than a week, Harapan almost made the same mistake.
Maszlee Malik: Facts behind the hype
To some extent, all’s well that ends well.
It sounded like Mahathir was a bit regretful that he was not able to take on the education portfolio, but in a show of statesmanship, he correctly judged that the higher priority was to protect the integrity of the new government during these crucial early days.
The eventual appointee also demonstrates that Harapan does not lack qualified candidates for ministerial posts.
I recalled hearing about Dr Maszlee Malik before, but didn’t know much about him.
I realise that reading Malaysiakini comments is not the best way to gleam a balanced impression, as one of the recurring themes there was, “This guy is a Zakir Naik supporter!”
This alarmed me at first, until I did my own independent research (a habit I highly recommend), and found that this was definitely a misrepresentation.
The few articles I found by him so far representing the Muslim Professionals Forum - such as this one, for example - demonstrated balanced, moderate and well-articulated views, including on the subject of Zakir Naik.
I imagine many by now have also seen the Whatsapp message listing out his many other merits that has been circulating.
Honesty and transparency
All in all, I think there is much to look forward to.
As we continue stepping bravely into the future though, let’s remember that honesty and transparency are two things that the country has lacked the most, and needs most badly.
These weeks and months will set the tone not only for this new administration, but for this new Malaysia.
It is thus imperative then, that right off the bat, we identify and hold fast to the principles and values that will best equip us to steer Malaysia to the future it deserves.
Among these, surely one of the most important is to remember that two and two is never three, nor five, but four - always four.
NATHANIEL TAN is eager to serve. -Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.