'Politicising' label to curb discourse

 

On July 20, 2022, Seputeh Member of Parliament Teresa Kok issued a statement urging the government to make the civil service more racially balanced.

Her statement was in response to the answer given in Parliament by the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Abdul Latiff Ahmad, about the racial composition of the civil service. 

Teresa in her statement said that for a multi-racial country like ours, a more representative civil service is important to reflect the ethnic make-up as the government pushes for its ‘Keluarga Malaysia’ slogan. 

She also pointed to several factors which, in her view, contributed to what she deems to be a racial imbalance within the civil service. 

Looking at her statement as a whole, one would come to the conclusion that the issues she raised are important ones. As a lawmaker, she has a duty to bring these matters to the fore and give her views and recommendations about them. 

It is therefore unfortunate to see the President of the Congress of Unions of Employees in the Public and Civil Services (Cuepacs), Adnan Mat take a ‘combative’ stand in response to Teresa’s statement. 

Adnan alleged that a lot of civil servants were pressured and threatened during Pakatan Harapan’s time in government. However, he did not offer any evidence of his allegations.

Cuepacs president Adnan Mat

More importantly, according to Adnan, Teresa should not ‘politicise’ the civil service. 

At the start of the Covid-19 pandemic two years ago, those who questioned the government’s response to Covid-19 were also accused of ‘politicising’ Covid-19. Especially if those who raised the questions were identified as those from the opposition. 

Similarly, when the Emergency was declared last year, those who opposed the proclamation were accused of ‘politicising’ the Yang di-Pertuan Agong’s decision at the time. 

Stifling discourse by ‘politicising’

Labelling legitimate questions and issues as ‘politicising’ is our way of stifling discourse on certain matters. It is a convenient label to stop certain questions from being asked or raised. 

In Teresa’s case, the Cuepacs president could have refuted Teresa’s statement with facts and figures. He need not accuse Teresa of ‘politicising’ the issue, nor should he make allegations about the Pakatan Harapan government. 

Similarly, how the government handled the pandemic and the circumstances and legitimacy of last year’s Emergency are all matters which are discussed publicly and have a significant impact on the people. 

Discussions about these issues should be allowed and even encouraged, instead of being negatively labelled. 

We should not resort to labelling every dissenting view or opinion as ‘politicising’ the matter. We should not use this label to curb legitimate discourse, as a means to stop people from talking about the subject. 

This is a democratic nation, and the only way this country can grow and develop is by constantly asking questions and raising issues. Some of these issues may be uncomfortable to us, and some of the questions may not be to our liking, yet it is important for these matters to be raised and addressed. And if wrong, refuted and corrected.

After all, this spirit of discourse and discussion is the founding basis of our country; a sovereign democratic and independent nation founded upon the principles of liberty and justice.

Let us stay true to this spirit. - Mkini

---

SYAHREDZAN JOHAN is a civil liberties lawyer, DAP national social media bureau chairperson, and a CEC member.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.