Nine Ministers' memo to PM: NST's feudalistic view

In the light of Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi’s response to the memorandum sent by nine non-Muslim ministers calling for a review of laws affecting the rights of non-Muslims, the New Straits Times' Brendan Pereira wrote that the ministers’ move was a misstep and not a “mature and measured way” to debate religion and race in the country. His view, in the paper’s “Plain Talk” column on 22 January, has got to take the cake for feudalistic thinking. Of the nine ministers, he wrote:

They knew it would provoke a furore. They have lived long enough in Malaysia and have occupied high office long enough to know that confrontation is as treacherous as going out to sea during the monsoon.

What they grossly underestimated was the power of perception in a country where the house-of-mirrors effect is more powerful than reality.

They also grossly underestimated the opportunity this misplaced act gave those who believe that matters of race and religion are best swept under the carpet and dealt with another day.

What they grossly underestimated was the untenable position such a memorandum would put on people like Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, who threw convention out the window and spoke on non-Muslim rights in public.

Pereira obviously did not read the memorandum. How then could he presume to know what exactly was in it to say that it did not amount to a “mature and measured” document?

And what was wrong with the nine ministers sending the memo to the PM? They did not tell their supporters and constituents to take to the streets to protest. They did not express their concerns openly through the media, which might have sensationalised the issues. What is so improper about the ministers expressing their views or concerns – views that reflected the concerns of many of their supporters and constituents - in writing to the Prime Minister?

Pereira claimed that even if the nine ministers’ intentions were good, Muslims on the ground might not perceive it the same way. But what about non-Muslims on the ground? His article had nothing to say about how they would see it. Are their views not important?

Pereira's commentary reveals a feudalistic mentality: the PM is always right - in this case, he was right to ignore the nine ministers’ move in the wake of protests from Muslim students and PAS members.

His remarks give us yet another indication of how much he is a “yes man” to the PM. Yet another indication of how much he and the paper he works for are stumbling blocks to a truly democratic Malaysia - one that accommodates different views and approaches (short of violence) to addressing issues.

New Year sacrificial lambs at the China Press

New Year celebrations had barely subsided when we were greeted with bad news about China Press - first, being shown a show-cause letter, and then having its top two editors turned into sacrificial lambs to please the mighty Internal Security Ministry.

With developments such as this, the outlook for media freedom does not look bright. What is disturbing about this episode is that the state has deliberately intervened in a journalistic matter that could have been handled by the management of the newspaper concerned. There wasn’t really a need for Big Brother to use the big stick.

Besides, the apparent reasons given by the ministry are questionable. It is true that the woman involved in the infamous ‘nude squats’ incident was later found to be Malay – not a Chinese national or an ethnic Chinese as was initially speculated. This, the government insisted, had sparked a diplomatic tiff between China and Malaysia and, of course, the tourist ringgit was affected. In other words, the journalistic error created unnecessary hassle between the two countries. But wait, what about the previous case of four Chinese women nationals who were allegedly forced to strip while in police custody? Doesn’t that also amount to causing diplomatic embarrassment, that is, if we were to still follow the government’s ‘reasoning’?

It appears that the ministry has become more brazen and unreasonable over the years. This is certainly due to several factors, some of which are the Printing Presses and Publications Act and the deafening 'silence' of many journalists when faced with such a situation. If the underlying intention of the ministry's action in punishing the China Press is to also warn other newspapers, then it seems that it has succeeded. We can expect the media to exercise more self censorship and rein in independent-minded journalists and editors. Of course, the 'ideal' situation would be to have this done behind the scenes away from the public eye. But, if that doesn't work, there is always the big stick - or the big axe.

Just look at how many newspapers actually bothered to cover the unfortunate ‘fall’ of these editors. Even if they did, just look at the coverage. Were they really bothered about the larger issue of speaking up for truth and justice? Not really – not when most of these media organisations are just business outfits whose primary concerns are ratings, readership/viewership, advertising revenue and the bottom line. It is in moments like this that the true inner self of these media establishments is bared – and it is not a pretty picture.

The real issue

The ethnicity of the woman doing ear squats is not the real issue here - no matter how the government may like to frame it or to divert the debate from the real issue of abuse of power and human rights violations.

The real issue is the dignity of the woman, the victim - irrespective of whether she is Malay, Chinese, or any other ethnic origin.

She is a human being, and she could be our mother or our sister.

Malaysia's international image would have been jeopardised either way, irrespective of whether the woman was a Chinese or Malay. If we condone such practices and turn a blind eye to them, then we would not be highly regarded as a nation that respects human rights.