Umno’s electoral defeats prove Malays reject corruption

 The leniency shown by some Malays towards former prime minister Najib Razak is in no way an acceptance of corruption, but one fuelled by frustration.

From Salahuddin Hamzah

I refer to a column by Tajuddin Rasdi, published on Oct 5.

I am furious with this theory. The writer’s argument, which suggests that Malays accept corruption, has little merit and is substantially unfair because it omits many important historical events. Let’s look back at the timeline.

Between 2014 and 2018, corruption was perceived to be at its peak due to the 1MDB scandal. What happened afterwards? Umno-Barisan Nasional was overwhelmingly voted out by the rakyat after ruling the country for 60 years.

In 2022, BN only won 30 seats. Isn’t it evident that the perceived corruption was rejected by the Malays?

After each defeat, Umno accepted the result wholeheartedly and openly welcomed investigations into allegations of corruption. Many leaders paid a heavy price, either through jail time, fines, or damage to their reputations. The leadership repeatedly called for the party’s revival. Yet the writer has refused to factor this into his argument.

The writer also claims that the majority of Malays pay little to no tax. This is an old song.

In reality, a large segment of Malaysia’s M40 population are Malays, and they pay taxes. The M40 are also largely working-class salaried employees, meaning the taxes they owe are automatically deducted from their income, leaving little room for tax avoidance.

In comparison, many of the much wealthier T20 taxpayers are business owners, where tax costs can potentially be transferred to consumers.

Let’s not even go into the largely non-Malay-dominated black market, which operates tax-free and involves billions of ringgit.

Regarding DAP as the bogeyman, the writer seems unable to accept the very nature of democracy – voters can choose freely. DAP being dominated by one race simply does not appeal to the majority of Malays. Marketing wise, DAP is a failure. But the writer refuses to acknowledge this.

The Malays’ lack of preference for DAP is instead portrayed as an acceptance of corruption. What kind of argument is this?

I firmly believe that the conscience of the Malays is entirely clear – Malays do not accept corruption. Any argument suggesting otherwise is simply racist and simplistic.

When former prime minister Najib Razak was convicted, Umno accepted the judgment with an open heart and “keinsafan” (remorse).

No one took to the streets claiming that the conviction was illegitimate. Umno only sought a royal pardon, which is a form of clemency provided for under the Federal Constitution.

The leniency shown by some Malays towards Najib is in no way an acceptance of corruption. It is substantially fuelled by the frustration that after Umno’s defeat, things do not seem to have gotten better.

Najib deserves his partial pardon considering his significant contributions to the country, despite the shortcomings.

I reject the writer’s theory. - FMT

Salahuddin Hamzah is an Umno Youth member and an FMT reader.

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