Dress code row camouflages a political rot in public service

 

Some news stories have legs. They keep running and running. But perhaps they’re actually legless, because they just stick around staring at us in the face day in and day out, smelling worse as time passes.

Now is such a moment, with a tonne of earlier stories about dress codes at government departments that wouldn’t go away and morphing into a story about the racial diversity within the public services.

I would think that it is bad to keep a citizen from making a police report because of her clothing. I speculated that at some point hospitals would get into the act, too, and right on cue, one just did.

At a time when the country is in the midst of an unending viral pandemic, facing some of the biggest economic challenges in a generation and a storm of political uncertainties, many have chosen to ignore these matters and instead focused on fighting unending battles on decorum, decency and of course, rights.

Lately such battles even invoke the Rukun Negara. Not all of the Rukuns mind you, just the part about “Kesopanan dan Kesusilaan” (good behaviour and morality), the fuzziest and most undefined, and hence the most convenient to define in any way you please.

Twisted logic

Others bring up the supremacy of the Federal Constitution and the Rule of Law, arguing these sit higher than Good Behaviour and Morality in the Rukun Negara for obvious and necessary reasons. Pretty logical argument, though pretty meaningless given this is not about logic.

Can public servants impose their own cultural and ethnic norms in deciding whom to serve and whom not to? Some seem to find it okay to bring rules from their own homes to deny fellow citizens the services that their taxes have paid for – including, horror of horrors, critical ones, such as public safety and health.

It transpires that the real power in government departments actually resides with the security guards at the gate, whose authority seems to be far greater than that of their bosses inside. True gatekeepers indeed, these Guardians of Good Behaviour and Morality at government premises.

I’m being facetious obviously. The decisions are all made by the big bosses inside, with the execution conveniently outsourced to the Little Napoleons at the gates, whose own sense of self-importance and invincibility (and lack of accountability and respect for the rights of others) guarantees maximum calamity.

Deal with it, Mr Prime Minister

This matter must be so toxic even the prime minister is steering clear from it.

Mr Prime Minister, we know the dangerous minefield this supposed nothingburger actually is, but at some point you have to show your hands and deal with it, before the security guards start thinking they run the country.

This brings us to the controversial issue of the racial composition of the civil service. This matter is a bit of a joke because try as hard as the defenders might, the many defending it just couldn’t get their stories together.

One the one hand, the powers that be in the civil service have categorically denied any racial discrimination there. According to them, the best person for the job is always hired, as per, well, whatever applicable regulations and SOPs there are.

Offensive defence

I call this defence the Mahathirian Offence, or MO, because it originated during Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s time in office, and for a defence, it’s actually rather offensive.

It goes like this: “We’re not biased (or dishonest, or corrupt, or whatever) because we have laws and regulations (mention said laws and regulations) that clearly say we shall not be biased (or dishonest or corrupt or whatever)…”

Then say “So how can we be biased? As far as we’re concerned, we are not biased…”

Basically that means “end of story, go away, at some point we may get really annoyed and then make your life miserable”.

So there you have it.

Who are you to dare to accuse us of discrimination when we have tons of rules and laws and Rukuns that say we don’t discriminate? After all, as far as we’re concerned, we don’t discriminate.

And that, fellow citizens, is the MO in dealing with this matter.

Discrimination and DAP

On the other hand, the political side’s defence pretty much admits discrimination but also goes straight for the jugular by claiming it is a dastardly plot (obviously perpetrated by the DAP) to chip away at the special rights of the Malays.

This defence usually comes from the more theocratic side of Malay politics, who have somehow managed to square the circle and turn the argument into being one about race and religion and rights, conveniently ignoring what Islam insists – duty, responsibility, fairness, and fulfilling amanah (trust).

In Malay politics today, anything related to the government is seen to be a part of Malay rights. Hence, questions about it are viewed as an assault on such rights, even if they have to spew some nonsense about the Rukun Negara while defending it.

Within the Malay body politic lies a vicious game of winner-takes-all. We’ve seen that before, and we now see that attitude being applied to ringfence anything convenient as “special rights” and matters of “morality and good behaviour”.

Real fear of being shown up

Hidden behind all these dramas is the very real fear among the Malays that the things they’ve won through politics, such as control of the government whether it be the civil service jobs or government contracts or public spending, is being subjected to scrutiny and accountability, and hence may be taken away or at least curbed.

Malaysia has always had some of the best public services in the region. However, a time when the Malays claim almost absolute ownership of the civil service is also the time when efficiency, integrity and accountability are at their lowest. No amount of shouting about rights can hide that.

How did we get here?

By keeping the temperature up through harping on racial issues and planting (and harvesting) seeds of fear and insecurity in the Malay psyche.

The real issues

This tactic has allowed our politicians, both the official ones in politics as well as the unofficial ones in the civil service and elsewhere, to continue to keep us khayal with manufactured outrage, blithely ignoring the real issues out there.

Issues such as the fact that we’re even further away from being strong and independent and able to stand on our own two feet without crutches and aids – after decades of being in power, and after enriching so many of the elites in our increasingly feudal society.

That our young are uneducated or under-educated and poorly equipped to deal with the real world, that many are in family units that are broken and unhealthy, physically as well as psychologically, being beset with so many ailments such as drugs, and that in spite of the posturing, we’re now even more scared of facing the real world out there than before.

Dignity of public service

What’s next? I’m sure the same argument about special rights and Rukun Negara or whatever will just keep resurfacing whether the topic is government scholarships or school curriculums or housing discounts.

It’s an increasing trend of unilaterally using political power to turn privileges and crutches into rights, and to ignore our responsibilities.

I know of an old man whom I admire a lot who spent many years in the government before taking optional retirement. He said he remained in the government longer than he should have, because of, in his words, the dignity of public service.

I don’t think we can find many out there now who feel that way about their job of serving the public. - FMT

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.