Dear Dr. Mahathir, we do seek greater reforms
(From theSun, 30th November 2012)
Dear Yang Amat Berbahagia Tun Mahathir Mohamad,
In your address to the 2012 Umno General Assembly earlier this week, you stated that the Barisan Nasional has “pandered” to the country’s demands for civil liberties whilst staying true to the objectives of protecting the welfare of the nation, race and religion. You then asked what further reforms Malaysians want, given that the government had already repealed the Internal Security Act (ISA) amongst many others.
You are right that there has been a slate of legislative changes made recently – for instance, the lifting of three Emergency Declarations, amending the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 and the Police Act, and repealing of the Banishment Act 1959 and Restricted Residence Act 1933. These are certainly positive steps in the right direction, which we applaud and congratulate.
Nevertheless, perhaps it might be pertinent to point out that many of these reform measures would not have taken place had it not been for the years of civil society’s campaigning and advocacy – work which, if I recall correctly, you were not necessarily a fan of during your time as Prime Minister. Had these NGOs not made demands for greater freedom of speech, the press and other fundamental human rights over the years (often labelled as troublemakers and worse, at times incarcerated, as a result thereof), the ruling government would not have responded.
However, it must be noted that in recent years you have certainly contributed to similar movements by promoting peace efforts in the Palestinian region and against war crimes; do keep up the good work.
You also made mention of Barisan Nasional ensuring inclusiveness by accepting parties from Sabah and Sarawak, as well as the People’s Progressive Party (PPP), Gerakan and “even PAS” over the years. Whilst it is positive that there is representation from a wide spectrum of varying communities within the ruling political coalition, and it may have been the best solution at the time, the term ‘inclusiveness’ has grown to mean much more than that, which has become somewhat perceived as mere tokenism to the public eye.
In the past, where there may have been interest groups solely representing their particular ethnicity or religion, today this has changed. Whilst there still exist some organisations advocating for their own myopic communal needs, others have moved with the times by pushing for issues regardless of race. This, with all due respect to organisations that you personally support, is the way forward for the country.
Movements that promote good governance with utmost commitment to public accountability, sound economic policy based on merit and need, an electoral system which allows for a level-playing field, along with basic civil rights, are some examples of how young Malaysians are participating in nation-building in an inclusive manner. When one speaks of citizenship, patriotism and belonging in a country, this is it – no longer in need of a singular, grand-standing ‘national identity’ that we have tried to create but in vain.
Sir, you also stated recently that democracy has its limitations; if people know nothing of implied responsibilities, this would result in instability, which in turn would not permit development. Herein lies the ongoing debate, namely the priority between civil and economic rights. My response would be that yes, it is true that there requires responsibility in every act of being a citizen of a country.
But in order to ensure all citizens are aware of their responsibilities, they must equally be educated on all possible aspects of a democracy. It is precisely the basics of a democratic state that, if done properly, should result in eventual positive development; equal access to education, the rule of law, clear separation of powers between the Judiciary, Executive and Legislative, institutional independence, individual freedoms, and the curbing of corruption, cronyism and nepotism at all levels so that, for example, mega projects do not benefit a small number of privileged individuals.
These are the things people are asking for. And far from an intent to create instability in the country, the reasons Malaysians are urging for more of such democratic reforms are exactly that they wish for a more developed nation for their children and grandchildren. They do not want a violent revolution – far from it. But to change things fundamentally, the system and structure with which the country is run, requires some great shift in the way people think and operate.
Many Malaysians remember you as the Prime Minister who put Malaysia on the world map. But the right question is not to ask “what further reforms we want”, as if it were unreasonable to accede to such requests, but “how else can all Malaysians partner in order to achieve these reforms”. Simply put, we all of us do want a better future, and it is the constant, often tiring, process of negotiation and difference in opinion on how to get there that makes for societal conflict.
Finally, Sir, you alluded to the fact that the opposition would demonstrate if they were to lose in the upcoming 13th General Election. As long as the Election Commission carries out its duties in a professional and fair manner, the results of the polls should be respected. As such, it is hoped that no matter which side emerges the victor to form the government, the loser should take the outcome in good spirits and ensure for a peaceful transition or continuation – depending on the results – of government. Most Malaysians would hope that both sides can commit to this.
Thank you for your commitment to the country you led for 22 years, and here’s to the next few exciting months ahead.
Yours sincerely,
A Malaysian who loves her country
