Hear ye, hear ye! Gather round, good people, for today’s proclamation from the Umno-dominated Ministry of Alternative Logic.
Once upon a time, town criers in Shakespearean garb declared who was guilty, who was innocent, and who had merely stolen the king’s chickens. But in Malaysia, Ahmad Maslan’s microphone has replaced the crier’s bell, and the message is far more entertaining.
Ordinarily, there would have been a modern-day cry on the lines of “Houston, we have a problem”, but with the history of his extraordinary pronouncements, there was no cause for alarm.
According to the latest decree, he that stealeth and plundereth the wealth of the land is innocent - provided he stayeth to fight in court.
In other words, guilt is not measured by what you did, but by whether you had the stamina to stand up and defend yourself.
On Wednesday, Ahmad unveiled this revolutionary doctrine at the biennial general meeting of the Najib Razak Friends Club 87.
The Umno supreme council member declared, “Najib (Abdul Razak) is not guilty even though he is serving a sentence. If they are not guilty, why do they run?”
The logic is breathtaking. By such standards, prisons across the land are filled not with convicts but with misunderstood patriots who lack the courage to abscond.
The former prime minister, we are told, is the bravest of them all - marching in and out of court like a knight in shining litigation, confident that innocence is a state of mind rather than a verdict.
This is not law; it is theatre. A performance where guilt is rewritten as bravery, and innocence is declared by applause rather than judgment. Umno has spoken: guilt is for quitters, innocence is for attendees, and justice is whatever the party says it is.
Ahmad’s tale
But wait, some background. In 2020, Ahmad himself was charged with failing to declare RM2 million received from Najib to the Inland Revenue Board.
The money, believed to be proceeds from unlawful activities, arrived via a cheque from AmIslamic Bank Berhad dated Nov 27, 2013, which Ahmad personally cashed the same day. He was also charged with giving a false statement to the MACC.
Before entering chambers, Ahmad even read out a four-line pantun (poem) declaring himself innocent and a victim of tyranny. But the cries of innocence fizzled when the case came up for hearing the following year.
Deputy public prosecutor Mukhzany Fariz Mokhtar told the court the prosecution had applied for a discharge not amounting to acquittal (DNAA) on both charges.
Ahmad initially refused to pay a compound, but after charges were read, his lawyer sent a letter of representation agreeing to pay RM1.1 million.
Certainly, one good turn deserves another. And Ahmad is now returning the favour - rewriting Najib’s conviction into courage, and innocence into attendance.
In Umno’s theatre, the guilty are cowards, the innocent are convicts, and the bravest act of all is simply showing up for the matinee. Attendance, not evidence, has become the new gold standard of justice.
When Ahmad rewrites Najib’s conviction into courage, he is not merely defending a party comrade - he is defending the very logic that once saved him.
After all, Ahmad himself walked away from charges by paying RM1.1 million, proving that in Malaysia, guilt can be negotiated, innocence can be performed, and justice can be discharged without acquittal.
How do I compare thee…
Oh yes. We have to thank Ahmad for not reminding us of what Najib’s son had to say about his father.
Nizar compared his father’s imprisonment to that of Nelson Mandela’s experience, saying that he would rise above the challenges as the South African anti-apartheid leader did.
"This is what happened to Prophet Yusuf, who was framed on a false charge and was elevated to a ministerial level in ancient Egypt, after he was released.
"The same happened to Mandela, who was jailed for opposing apartheid and went on to become the South African president who reunited the country's people, upon his release.”
In a response, I wrote: “How do you compare a statesperson who stood up against an oppressive regime with a thief who plundered the nation’s wealth?
“Mandela fought for the end of apartheid, and his work inspired and continues to inspire others to stand up against oppression and fight for freedom.”
What will Najib be remembered for? He was already described as “kleptocracy at its worst” by former US attorney-general Jeff Sessions, and by The Economist as a “brazen kleptocrat”.
At home, the Court of Appeal described him as a “national embarrassment”.
For whom the bell tolls
Against such a backdrop, Umno’s “new” definition of innocence is not merely difficult to swallow - it is indigestible.
It asks the public to accept that serving a sentence is proof of bravery and innocence, that paying a compound fine is proof of integrity, and that showing up in court is proof of virtue.
In this upside-down morality play, guilt is no longer about the crime, but about the cowardice of running away; innocence is no longer about the verdict, but about the stamina to attend hearings.
It is a doctrine that stretches logic until it snaps, leaving justice gasping for air.
This is the true brilliance of Umno’s alternative logic: it transforms the courtroom into a stage, the pantun into a script, and the verdict into applause.
And so, when justice becomes performance, verdicts fade into applause - and Najib remains the star of Malaysia’s long-running legal drama. The audience may change, the script may evolve, but the show goes on.
In this theatre, innocence is not proven; it is proclaimed. And the bell tolls not for justice, but for the next act. - Mkini
R NADESWARAN is a veteran, award-winning journalist who writes on bread-and-butter issues. Comments: citizen.nades22@gmail.com
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT
