MIC representing Malaysian Indians

I was not surprised over the statement made by MIC President, Samy Vellu that MIC is the sole representative of the Indian community as reported in Malaysiakini today.

As much as he realised that they had ignored the electronic media in GE 2008, he seems to have to have had a memory lapse in the sense that he has forgotten that the voting pattern transcended beyond the racial lines.

Add the fact that there are more Indian MPs in People's Alliance compared to the National Front. Perhaps the People's Alliance's Indian MPs need to form an ad hoc committee to raise Indian issues as UMNO is currently playing the Malay unity card.

I do hope that all MPs regardless of race and religion would stand up to defend their all communities in their respective communities.

Mahathir quits UMNO?

By quitting UMNO, is Tun Dr Mahathir sending an impending signal of the upcoming crisis? One thing is sure, though. History repeats.

Apart from Tun Abdul Razak who died in office, Both Tunku Abdul Rahman and Tun Hussein Onn who are Malaysia's first and third premiers respectively had quit UMNO following the 1988 crisis that saw the birth UMNO (Baru) and Semangat 46.

From another perspective I dare deduce that the present premier may have to quit his party in the future.

Plus, did anyone realise that the number of opposition seats in the parliament is equivalent to Dr Mahathir's age?

Najib and the Altantuya case

I read on Najib's statement in Malaysiakini on the Altantuya case with a tongue-in-cheek. Since the beginning of the case our DPM's name was a regular feature. The prosecution team had even gone to the extend of declaring that the DPM is not connected in anyway to the murder of this case.

In the course of the proceeding of the case, there were remarks form Abdul Razak Baginda's wife that Razak doesn't aspire to be the Prime Minister.

And a few weeks ago, Raja Petra was charged under Sedition Act over the article, Lets send the Altantuya murderers to hell.

Looking at it from a different perspective, there is no need for Najib to comment on this issue. After all the case is being tried in court. Commenting on an ongoing case would be equivalent to contempt of court

Karpal and the Malay Sultanate Saga

The current political drama over Bukit Gelugor MP, Karpal Singh’s statement and police report against Perak Sultan and the Raja Muda of Kelantan is an interesting one.

Certain parties such as the Perak UMNO Youth, the BN Back Benchers Club and Malay Unity Action Front have lodged a police report and there are reports among the BN that Karpal Singh who is DAP chairman be charged for treason since he is alleged to have raised the sensitivities of the Malay community by raising the issue of the Malay Sultanates. Commenting on this matter, Tengku Adnan commented that:

“He had made a strong comment that the Sultan and royalty were subject to the law just like a normal citizen following the amendments to the Federal Constitution in 1993.

“The comments were like a warning to the Sultan of Perak and other Malay Rulers that they should not interfere in state administrative matters”

In the latest development, Karpal has defended his statement. There are at least ten reports lodged against Karpal Singh as was reported thus

I would like to view this from another perspective since action speaks louder than words.

A Historical perspective

The Malay sultanates are a permanent feature in Malaysia’s past, present and future. So strong are their influence that the second principle of our Rukunegara is “Loyalty to the King and Nation”.

In the 1991 publication of Pelindung, Chandra Muzaffar wrote that the British maintained the positions of the Malay sultanates even though they were the ones who actually wielded power in the Federated Malay States via resident system. On the other hand the Malay sultanates had more power and discretion in the non-federated Malay states.

Opposition to Malayan Union in 1948 occurred largely due to reduced role of the Malay Sultanates under the Malayan Union plan. It was a prelude to the formation of UMNO. Their main objective then was to protect the interest of the sultanates. One of the resolutions stated is, “Terminating the powers of the Sultanate spells the demise of the Malay States in Peninsular” (Menamatkan kuasa-kuasa Sultan, maka musnahlah sama sekali Negeri – negeri Melayu di Semenanjung Tanah Melayu.

Chandra also noted a point in the reduction of influence of the Malay sultanate over the rakyat in tandem with UMNO’s increasing influence.

Fast forward to 1993, a major development took place in terms of the federal constitution. It is in this very year that the UMNO – led Barisan Nasional government passed a major constitutional amendment that restricted somewhat the authority of the Malay Sultanates.

The Dewan Rakyat parliamentary bill, in its explanatory statement states that “the bill seeks to amend the relevant provisions of the Federal Constitution for the purpose of withdrawing the immunity of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the rulers from any legal proceedings in any court in their personal capacities and to make consequential amendments arising thereform.”

It is fascinating to note that the UMNO that was formed to protect the Malay sultanates in 1948 had actually led the BN coalition to successfully amend the constitution as well as restrict the privileges of Malay sultanates whose roles were already becoming ceremonial in nature.

Shortly before the amendment was tabled in the august house, several issues such as the extravagant lifestyle of the royalties were highlighted in the electronic media, especially by the state owned RTM and TV3. These were done by the Mahathir administration to convince and justify the need for such an amendment.

These are some of the events that must be taken into consideration before further statement and action are done. Malays Forget Easily is a book title popularized by Tun Dr Mahathir during his premiership. In this sense I would like to state that even Malaysians forget easily. Hence the above outline.

In post March 8, didn’t 22 BN state assemblymen almost launched a boycott the appointment of Ahmad Said as Menteri Besar of Terengganu by Sultan Mizan Zainal Abidin? The boycott did not materialise simply because Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi decided to back it off and support the Sultan’s choice instead of his.

A similar scenario also took place in Perlis when Raja Syed Sirajuddin elected Dr Md Isa Sabu instead of the incumbent Datuk Shahidan Kassim. The appointment was made in accordance to Article 39 (2) of the state constitution states that the Raja can appoint whoever he feels has the trust of the members to be menteri besar. Despite that, there was a gathering of 100 people in Putrajaya in support of Shahidan. Aren’t these acts defying the sultanates?

As the event unfolds, I cannot decide who is right and wrong but I would like to reiterate the fact that action speaks louder than words. If Karpal’s statement was seditious, would the UMNO - led BN’s concerted effort in amending the constitution be equivalent to treason?

Lastly, I would like to stress the fact that the sultans are not just sultans for the Malays. They are the sultans to every single citizen residing in their respective states. They are the Malaysian sultanate and not simply the Malay sultanate.

---

____________________________________________________________________

An edited version was published in Malaysiakini 0n May 13, 2008