It is gratifying to see that three years after the 14th general election (GE14) in 2018, Bersih has roused again and is urging Malaysians not to hesitate to take to the streets again, to “fight the system” and to “display their dissatisfaction”.
Is it coincidental that Pakatan Harapan is once again in the opposition? The message to "struggle on" is certainly what we want to hear since we are still living under an unjust, undemocratic, and oppressive state but first, the Bersih leadership must clear up some inconvenient truths, namely:
1. Why was Bersih so compliant with the Harapan federal government between 2018 and 2020? How was it that so many Bersih leaders were co-opted into the Harapan government which morphed into BN 2.0?
2. Were there no issues that they were dissatisfied with during Harapan's rule?
3. Is it not time to put forward concrete demands if we are concerned about real reforms in Malaysian society instead of just “free and fair elections”?
This is the time for reform-minded Malaysians to reflect on what the Bersih rallies were all about, what kind of reforms we are demanding, and to what extent they were the same or different from former BN policies.
Bersih in hibernation between 2018 and 2020.
First, we saw the sell-out of the movement when the Great Dictator of 1981-2003 was made the leader of the so-called “Save Malaysia” campaign, sharing the stage with Bersih leaders and he then became the Harapan Prime Minister.
Did the NGO activists of yesteryear suddenly forget what the Mahafiraun did to Malaysia and Malaysians during those years? He had not shown a shred of remorse for his authoritarian rule from 1981 to 2003.
Putting the former dictator as the head of the supposedly ‘Reform Movement’ was bare-faced opportunism. Some have said it was like putting the fox in the hen house! Did Bersih protest this?
Then, when Harapan became the political master, we saw the co-option of erstwhile Bersih leaders into the administration. One revealed that he had lobbied among Harapan leaders to be given a high post in the federal administration.
Another was likewise rewarded with the chair of a commission and was such an artful dodger that he even changed camps and stayed on after the Perikatan Nasional administration took over!
How could the reform movement advance when their leaders were openly opportunistic and were happily co-opted into the exploitative state?
Did Bersih protest stalling of demands in Harapan manifesto?
Opportunism in its crudest form can be seen when politicians and activists target an individual, namely former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak, rather than the political regime and political-economic system that oppresses, divides, and exploits the people.
This was clearly the main objective as Harapan and Bersih happily went along with it. As is now revealed to all, Mahathir’s “Save Malaysia” campaign in GE14 was mainly aimed at expelling Najib while maintaining the same racist and exploitative rule.
As events unfolded after 2018, Harapan became more and more like BN 2.0 especially with the assimilation of Umno MPs into Mahathir’s then Bersatu party. Even PKR president Anwar Ibrahim was considering accepting the former BN minister Salleh Said Keruak into his party.
The most revealing and distressing initiative of all was the so-called “Malay Dignity Congress” with its racist resolutions and which Mahathir patronised, as well as the continuation of the New Economic Policy in the new "Shared Prosperity Vision".
And as this short rule by Harapan ambled along, it failed to meet manifesto promises and voter expectations in numerous ways. We witnessed flip flops over their promise to abolish toxic institutions and laws, such as Sosma and other detention-without-trial laws in the country.
Nor did their promises focus on the most urgent and comprehensive reforms that civil society has long argued are of high priority. On top of all that, we saw a disturbing trend of autocratic decisions and policies symptomatic of the old Mahathir 1.0 era.
While the Harapan manifesto prohibited the prime minister from also taking on the finance portfolio, Mahathir in the first 100 days succeeded in taking over the choicest companies, namely Khazanah, PNB, and Petronas under his Prime Minister's Office.
It was the return to the old Mahathirist autocracy. Was the cabinet consulted on the decision to start Proton 2, privatise Khazanah, Malaysia Incorporated, and revive the failed F1 circuit?
Mahathir's appointment of Economic Affairs Minister Azmin Ali to the board of Khazanah Nasional Bhd also went against the Harapan manifesto promise of keeping politicians out of publicly funded investments since it leads to poor accountability.
Did Bersih protest these reneges on the Harapan manifesto?
The excuse the Harapan government gave for delaying local government elections by claiming lack of funds was not acceptable. It was equally absurd to tell Malaysian Independent Chinese Secondary School graduates that their UEC certificate could only be recognised in five years’ time. This was a serious breach of promise in the manifesto since more than 80 percent of Chinese voters voted for Harapan because of this promised reform.
Did Bersih protest this?
What concrete reforms are Bersih demanding now?
Come to think of it, were Bersih’s demands for reforms concrete enough for us to take to the streets? Of course not. But take to the streets Malaysians did because of the outrage felt against the authoritarian and corrupt rule of Mahathir and then Najib’s continuation of that rule.
Now in hindsight, with more space for sober reflection, it is high time Bersih gets clear about the kind of society we want that is different from the Mahathir-led and Najib-led governments. Will an Anwar-led government be any different?
Malaysian voters deserve a meaningful and specific proposal that can lead to substantive identifiable changes that go beyond slogans such as “Save Malaysia”, “Save the economy” and other fluffy concepts.
It is time for the Reformasi and Bersih movements to regroup under a more concrete and clearer reform agenda that is committed to a progressive alternative to the BN and Harapan coalitions. These must include:
1. People-centred and sustainable development
2. Equitable wealth redistribution
3. Needs-based not race-based policies
4. A progressive economic policy
5. Defending human rights and rule of law
6. Zero tolerance for corruption
7. A far-sighted and fair education policy
8. An improved public healthcare system
9. A people-centred and caring social policy
10. Prioritising orang asal rights and livelihood
11. Defence cuts and a culture of peace
NGO activists are watchdogs, not lapdogs of the capitalist state
At the GE14 in 2018, we succeeded in toppling a corrupt and dysfunctional BN regime only to be quickly disillusioned by a Harapan government that treated their election manifesto as a useless booklet that could be ignored after the election.
Malaysia’s economic growth stagnated and the stock market fell which resulted in the peoples’ revolt against Harapan at the Tanjung Piai by-election. That was a grim reminder to all of us that if we do not act quickly to point to a way forward for the nation, we will be stuck with this BN/Harapan circus for the future with grave consequences for the people of this country.
Through the years, Malaysian NGOs have been playing the important role of watchdogs to ensure the rule of law and human rights are safeguarded. Political parties and politicians can twist and turn, come and go within the same capitalist state but the workers’ movement, women’s movement, civil rights movement, and green movement must go on forever.
Politicians like to spout the platitude that “politics is the art of the possible” but movements must bear pressure on them to make our demands possible. With the failures of both BN and Harapan regimes in providing good governance and the similarity of their race-based, profits-before-people policies, the challenge for Malaysian civil society is clear: Be the change we want to see, provide the progressive vision of a Malaysia we want, and organise the progressive Third Force the country needs. There is no room for opportunism among NGO activists.
Thus, if Bersih is ready to march again, great. But after the let-down and sell-out of 2018, Bersih leaders must first clarify if they are a People’s Front or a Harapan Front. And they must spell out the concrete reforms we are demanding and how committed they are to real reforms for the people. - Mkini
KUA KIA SOONG is an adviser of Suara Rakyat Malaysia (Suaram).
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.