Interesting take by Prof Dr Mohd Tajuddin on Zahid's DNAA decision in his column, "Bangsa Johor triumphs over PN's Bangsa Melayu rhetoric and civil society outbursts", in The Star Sunday.
It could partly be due to Zahid being more palatable to the Professor cum DAP politician since UMNO is in bed with DAP via the cooperation between BN and PH.
However, his narrative is more refreshing than the widepread prejudicial presumption and prejudgement of Zahid. One can read it here or the excerpt at the end of this posting.
The presumption and prejudgement may have derived from the unrealistic expectation of the public and perhaps, politicians and civil society of this imperfect world.
Dr Tajuddin rebutted it to basically tell 'em it ain't no Barbie world, below:
Looking for a Barbie doll world
By PROF DR MOHD TAJUDDIN MOHD RASDI
We should all know by now that we don’t live in a perfect world.
EVER since the unity government was formed in November 2022, it seems that it can never do anything right. This observation is not from the Opposition coalition, mind you. This comes from ordinary Malaysians airing their views in columns and comments.
I’m amazed at the number of perfectionist armchair politicians we have.
The conclusion that I draw from these reactions is that these people are unhappy with the present leadership and this particular government.
Of course, they are extremely unhappy with, or even frightened by, the current Opposition, that powerful (mostly) one-race bloc that flaunts its religiosity as justification for its many incredulous suggestions directed not only at the government but the people of Malaysia too.
So the Opposition is a “no-no” while the unity government is just a “no”?
I have a problem with perfectionists. Our education system teaches us to “go for perfection”, ignoring the fact that perfection can only exist in a Barbie doll world.
In that pink-saturated world (featured in the surprisingly deep movie, Barbie), there are no problems, there’s a party all day long, and laughter all night after that. There are no bills to pay, children to scold, neighbours parking in your driveway, cats pooping on your windshield and pigeons just doing their business wherever they choose.
The Barbie world, it seems to me, is perfect for most of these Malaysians who sneer at the unity government with statements like: “Where is the *Madani government after Zahid’s DNAA (discharge not amounting to an acquittal of Umno president Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s graft cases), or “Where is your ‘walk the talk’ on corruption”, or “Why are you pressing on too much Islam in schools with the 40 Nawawi Hadith”, and let’s not forget university students demanding “How come we have to segregate in rocking all night at a concert”?
So this unity government seems to have failed the Reformasi test, the Madani exam, and the Malaysia of the 1960s viva voce. As the Malay song goes, “Ini salah, itu salah, jadi semuanya serba salah” (this is wrong, that is wrong, so everything is wrong).
I would like to point out the bigger picture to remind all Malaysians siapa yang sebenarnya salah (who is actually at fault).
The first thing the armchair politicians are getting wrong is that this is a Reformasi government. It is not, it’s a unity government. Do we not understand what that implies?
Well, try and imagine that you just got that long-awaited promotion – but you find out that you can’t fire, demote or transfer your two worst enemies in the department. In fact, they are in the office right next to yours. How are you going to do any work? Easy or not?
Next, let us look at what “politics” means.
According to Wikipedia, it’s “the set of activities associated with making decisions in groups [on matters] such as the distribution of resources or status”. Does it say anything about professionalism, efficiency or responsibility? If anyone expects all that from a government, I would be forced to ask which planet they come from.
And which organisation in the world has an easy relationship between workers and customers? Every one of them has issues and problems. But despite the problems, organisations try their hardest to deliver. Usually with hope of improving with time.
A government made up of more than 1.5 million employees is not an organisation of 2,000 employees or even 20,000. And, basically, you can’t fire anyone who isn’t up to snuff, which is something you could do in a company.
So which is easier to run, a government or a company?
Malaysians act as if civil servants (who are mostly Malay) are workers in a company, that they can come in one day and fire half of the workers the next. There would be instant civil unrest, and the head of the government’s house will come under siege.
Let’s not assume any one of us could easily wear the mantle of a prime minister, much less a PM with former enemies as partners and civil service machinery that thinks it’s there by an act of God.
Finally, do the armchair politicians understand realpolitik?
Okay, first, I am not a political science major so I do not have any deep background on what the word means. As far as I can tell from what I’ve read, it means that wheeling and dealing, serving sentiment over principles or rationality, and trading favours are the order of the day. Realpolitik answers the hard question of “What can we actually do, realistically, now, and perhaps, just maybe, in the future?”
I venture that those who have been married for more than 30 years know what realpolitik is. A good 90% of married life is about compromise, trading favours, tolerance, acceptance, loyalty and all that without expecting reciprocity. Love before marriage means something absolutely different from what it means after 20 years, 50 years of marriage.
So “good governance” exists only on a piece of paper, like marriage contracts and vows. The real meat is in the living, the challenges, the struggle, the compromises, the growth and the despair – but also the hope.
If we cannot appreciate a man who has been unjustly imprisoned not once but twice, who does not take a salary, who has not awarded projects to his children, if we still think we can do a better job than him, then well, I don’t know what to say.
You know, I think I now understand the armchair politicians. They want a Barbie world Malaysia to replace the real Malaysia even though we all live lives full of challenges, struggles and compromise. (But also of growth and hope.)
*Madani is an acronym for the government’s overarching policy that embraces six core values: keMampanan (sustainability), KesejAhteraan (prosperity), Daya cipta (innovation), hormAt (respect), keyakiNan (trust) and Ihsan (compassion).
Prof Dr Mohd Tajuddin Mohd Rasdi is Professor of Architecture at the Tan Sri Omar Centre for Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Studies at UCSI University. The views expressed here are entirely the writer’s own.
Excerpt from Tajuddin's Sunday column below to conclude:
Secondly, I wish to take to task prominent civil society personalities who accused Anwar of interfering with the Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi court case when the latter was granted a DNAA by the court.
I had two simple thoughts: firstly, Ahmad Zahid is still not off the hook so why the fuss? Secondly, as far as I understand it, if lawyers are crafty enough to put up some kind of representation and the AG needs to act on it, why should Anwar be implicated?
If these civil society personalities suspect something rotten then firstly, where is the proof that Anwar interfered? Secondly, are they privy to the full information and considerations of the AG as well as the judge's decision?
I am most sad when I see the same personalities who fought on the streets and in the media to uphold a Malaysia for all, their hearts seem to have no place for Anwar who went to prison twice while the same personalities sat comfortably in their homes passing judgement on others.
I feel that these personalities owe Anwar Ibrahim an apology. Why do I say so? Firstly, these people do not have a shred of evidence to justify their accusations. Their argument centres directly on court procedure and the process of the prosecution.
I do not want to comment as I am not a law student but I am satisfied with the explanation from the AG's Chambers and also of the new AG Datuk Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh, who said this issue of granting DNAA is a normal affair as long as judgement has not been passed.
I cannot say if the two AGs are wrong or right, but they said it so take it up with them-lah! Why drag Anwar and the unity government into this?
This country is filled with good-intentioned citizenry but cares not about solid proof before lambasting a leader who for all we know, would be the only one who can take us out of this mess that Barisan Nasional created and Perikatan Nasional has worsened.
Democracy does not mean that you can tick off the leader and then say: "Well, it's freedom of speech-lah!"
You may be free to talk or say anything but there are many who may judge your tone, your adab (custom), and your motives.
Just because you braved the sun and water cannons do not give you carte blanche to hurl accusations in a manner befitting a pasar malam food crier.
You can criticise and be concerned about anything – that is your right – but take into consideration all the facts and context, and most importantly, have some respect for the one you criticise.
Democracy does not know adab, does not have our faith or culture and does not know our Rukun Negara of "kesopanan dan kesusilaan" (good behavior and morality).
But we all know good manners, have values from our faith or culture, and we all study the Rukun Negara. So, there is no excuse! The question I have is if these personalities are fighting for their own selfish self or the "self" of this nation?
After the reaction of PN to call for gathering at Sogo ala Pakatan Rakyat days on Malaysia Day (in which they have not applied for police permit) and ruckus in Parliament, it will take a bit more time before sharing any insider understanding of Zahid's DNAA decision.
This blog have repeatedly said Zahid is innocent because there is no predicate offenses to justify the long list of alleged AMLA offenses. This view was made despite getting insider tip-off that Zahid's case is a surer thing than Najib's.
Prima facie is a Latin expression to means “at first sight”, “at first view", or "based on first impression". It does not mean guilty yet. When Zahid made a legally allowable representation, AG realised the case does not justify proceeding.
That is to it.
The public need to know more detail to find fault and satisfy their prejudicial presumption and prejudgement that Zahid is guilty when he is not, at least not yet till further investigation.
Consequence to Zahid's DNAA decision, Najib and Arul Kanda audit case High Court acquital decision upheld by the Court of Appeal and RCI against Tommy Thomas that was intentionally postphoned by Ismail Sabri is now on.
To date, all the cases charged related to 1MDB locally except the easier to designed SRC case, ended in acquital. Out of fear all the cases will be acquited, the mean and vengeful Muhyiddin directed to hire Rosli Dahalan to do civil lawsuit against Najib, Arul Kanda and others to keep the cases politically relevant for GE16.
As far as Yayasan Akal Budi case (the earlier set related UKSB was acquited DAA), reliable informer claimed it was never properly investigated by MACC and a rush job selectively done to maliciously prosecute him. A matter of time it would eventually prove the malafide of Mahathir, Tommy Thomas and Latheefa Koya collaborated to do selective and malicious prosecutions.
It means the noisy segment of opinion makers and public are politically motivated to hide the truth and unfairly crucify Najib and Zahid instead of pursuing for justice.
No comments:
Post a Comment