Why does Najib want to debate, now?

When former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak wants to debate, you know something’s not right.

In the past, Najib’s government never accepted any offer to debate. He famously said that debate is not our culture. He never accepts debate offers, let alone offer them. To initiate a debate against DAP veteran Lim Kit Siang now is strange.

I think it’s because Najib understands one concept: A political debate is never about the debate, it is about performance. It’s not an intellectual exchange, it’s a showcase of rhetoric.

A politician would consider a debate successful if he’s able to sound good, go on populist overdrive to a roaring crowd, and humiliate and embarrass his debate opponent. He doesn’t have to engage with the finer points from the other side; he doesn’t even have to make sense.

So it doesn’t matter whether the debate topic is “How Malaysia became a global kleptocracy and how we can become a leading nation of integrity” or something else. Najib insists that the debate will not be limited to this topic because he knows: a political debate is not about the debate, it is about performance.

When you are in the opposition, you do not appear in the mainstream media every day. That is why public debates become important to push Najib back into the public imagination. He needs a public performance to remind people he is still there.

And Najib will be focusing on two key performance metrics in this debate. First, to insist that the government is controlled by DAP. Second, to bring his court cases from the court of law to the court of public opinion.

To show the government is controlled by DAP

First, Najib and his cyber troopers have frequently insisted that the government is controlled by DAP. His Facebook posts always pivot towards the “government equals DAP” angle, and many WhatsApp groups have continued propagating the false nightmare of a Chinese takeover.

This line of propaganda works most effectively. Every post that plays on this insecurity guarantees higher-than-usual online traction. The reality of having a non-Malay finance minister, attorney-general and chief justice strengthens the insecurity, even though there is no real and apparent threat towards the racial stability of the country.

Additionally, Najib must play on this narrative to keep his political career alive. Since losing government, Najib will no longer be trusted in any talk about policy and governance. The remaining space for any fallen kleptocrat is on identity politics that are divisive and irresponsible - to stay at the fringes where extremism and fear are played with fire.

That is why Najib had deliberately chosen Kit Siang (photo, above) and no one else. If it is Kit Siang, it is easy to draw the line of government-DAP-Chinese-communism. It is easier to incite bitter memories of the days where the government was nearly lost to Chinese control.

Najib could have picked a member of the government who had a better sense of the goings-on on government policy, but it had to be Kit Siang. Because nothing would help advance Najib’s right-wing credentials like contrasting himself to Kit Siang.

Bringing the court to the public

Second, Najib is interested in using the public debate to win his case in the court of public opinion. Often, politicians would prefer to try their cases in the court of law where the truth has a higher chance of prevailing without undue influence of emotions and irrationality. A court that has rules of evidence that determines relevancy, admissibility, witnesses, documents, proof, presumptions and corroboration would likely ensure all parties get their chance to speak the truth.

The problem for Najib is that the truth is not favourable to him. He needs a platform where he could have his own version of the truth so that the public could be manipulated into believing that he isn’t guilty. Najib could use the public debate to proclaim his innocence and claim that he is a victim of the Pakatan Harapan administration - DAP’s administration. And when he is finally found guilty, he could attempt a martyrdom and cry victimhood.

He doesn’t want the truth to be determined by the court of law; he wants to determine the truth like he’s the God of all.

In the end, the public debate would only help consolidate Najib’s right-wing flair and mislead the public on his guilt.

The plight of principle

There’s a need to protect the higher principle of encouraging public debates. Making debates our culture is a good thing: it is intellectually valuable in encouraging a thinking society; it is democratically valuable in evaluating the speaker’s honesty and sincerity; and it is socially valuable in providing oratory and stylistic entertainment.

To have the first public debate between heavyweights Najib and Kit Siang is also good in drawing maximum public attention. But I fear.

I fear that the good that comes out of this debate will be minimal compared to the harm. If we think about how Najib may manipulate the entire debate for his self-centred interest, then the benefits of upholding the principle of having a public debate seems minuscule.

But I hold my breath. After all, he disappeared in a public debate before. He has something to hide.

JAMES CHAI works at a law firm. E-mail him at jameschai.mpuk@gmail.com - Mkini