Restoring the dignity of the monarchy (UPDATED with Chinese Translation)
Whether we shall still see a monarchy come 2050 or by then Malaysia would become a republic is anyone’s guess. But whatever it may be the royal family would be the one who decides this. And the deciding factor would be in how they conduct themselves over these next few decades.
NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
I have many times been accused of being a royalist. I make no bones about it. Yes, I am a royalist or monarchist. But I am realistic enough to know that if we do not do something about it then the days of the monarchy are numbered.
And I am not only saying this now. I have been saying it since way back in the 1980s during the Constitutional Crisis when Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Umno dragged the Rulers through the mud and exposed their so-called wrongdoings. Some of it was true of course. But quite a bit was fabricated and nothing but a pack of lies.
Lies or otherwise, the people believed the allegations and many called for an end to the Constitutional Monarchy and for Malaysia to be turned into a republic. And I told the royal households of Selangor, Terengganu, Perlis, Kedah, Negeri Sembilan and Perak that if they do not change and start behaving, we might no longer see a monarchy come the new millennium.
There was no disagreement. Those present that day, save the members of the Johor, Pahang and Kelantan royal households, agreed that some members of the royal family are misbehaving and that the acts of a few endanger everyone, even those who are not misbehaving. It was agreed that the royal households must not only behave but they must also take to task those who do not behave. In other words, the royal families would police themselves to ensure that the acts of a few do not harm the rest.
This was discussed and agreed 25 years or so ago. Some of those sitting on the throne in the 1980s have now been replaced by their next in line. We were in fact eagerly awaiting the death of those Rulers of the 1980s (not a nice thing to say, I know) so that the new generation could take over. And this has already happened in states such as Selangor, Terengganu, Perlis, Negeri Sembilan and Johor (and probably Kelantan as well if they can resolve their palace crisis).
But have things changed much? Has the change of Rulers seen a change in palace culture? Apparently not! What seems to have happened instead is we are just seeing old wine in new bottles.
The piece by renowned constitutional law expert Abdul Aziz Bari that was published in Malaysiakini today explains part of the problem. You can read the piece below. I have stolen it from Malaysiakini without their permission (but then I have committed worse crimes than that in the past).
The monarchy is suffering from a serious case of a bad image. Malaysians no longer look at the monarchy with respect as in the days gone by. The dignity the monarchy once had is no longer there. If you were to conduct a poll or referendum, you would most likely find that more than 50% of Malaysians would vote in favour of a Republic of Malaysia.
Under Malaysian law, this is a crime under the Sedition Act. If you ask for the monarchy to be abolished you can be arrested and sent to jail. So no one dares say so openly. But in the privacy of their homes or in closed discussions, the majority of Malaysians would admit they see no more use for the monarchy.
Even the majority of Australians, although they do not have a monarchy as such, voted in favour of retaining the Queen of England as their monarch. Most Thais would defend their monarchy to the death. The British, although they are not too happy with the conduct of their royal family, do not want to see a Republic of Britain. But most Malaysians would rather see the end of the monarchy.
The future of the monarchy is in the hands of the Rulers and members of their royal family. The ongoing Kelantan palace crisis and the recent feud between two southern royal households only strengthens the belief of many Malaysians that the monarchy is a relic of the past that no longer works in this day and age.
Whether we shall still see a monarchy come 2050 or by then Malaysia would become a republic is anyone’s guess. But whatever it may be the royal family would be the one who decides this. And the deciding factor would be in how they conduct themselves over these next few decades.
In short, the fate of the monarchy lies in the hands of the monarchs themselves.
*************************************************
Sultans and mosques: Decree or puppetry?
Renowned constitutional law expert Abdul Aziz Bari sheds some light on the motivation behind the sudden resurgence in the role of Malay rulers’ as the head of Islam, long left unpractised, yet suddenly re-appearing under questionable circumstances.
He stressed that while, constitutionally, rulers are the head of the religion, this special position and vested powers must be exercised in accordance with Islamic tenets and independent from the government of the day.
“This is how the [royalty’s role] left unregulated by the constitution needs to be understood. Not at the rulers’ own whims and fancies,” he explained.
Speaking to Malaysiakini in an exclusive interview, the UIA law professor contends that contrary to their role as head of the religion, the rulers’ personal character and knowledge about Islam leave a lot to be desired.
“This is too evident and has become a matter of public knowledge,” Abdul Aziz said.
What is more puzzling though, “why are the rulers suddenly become so assertive?”
Questions over sultans’ neutrality
“Where was the Sultan of Selangor when Khir Toyo issued a directive to prevent tazkirah in the mosques during the Ramadan? What did the sultan do when Toyo demolished a mosque in Bangi and locked one in Batu Tiga some years ago?” he asked.
Abdul Aziz also pointed out the incident in where the Agong suddenly said no to the proposal to put a Penang DCM as the chairman of the zakat fund there.
“As the head of Islam in Malacca, Sabah and Sarawak, why is it that the Agong did not do the same over there. Does this indicate that the other three states are better than Penang?” he asked.
He said that other incidents involving the rulers and religion also took place in Pahang and Perak.
The law professor added that “these are some the things that Perak Regent Raja Nazrin – who two weeks ago reminded that the rulers have complete control over religion – ought to bear in mind.”
Abdul Aziz then opined that the ‘selective’ occurrences of the royalty stepping forward to be the defender of the faith seems to coincide with matters to do with states ran by the Pakatan Rakyat.
“These royal pronouncements seem to have been moved by circles close to Umno, in particular the cases in Selangor and Penang,” suggested Abdul Aziz.
But be it in Perak, Selangor, Penang or Perlis, the constitutional law expert is of the opinion that things are moving in Umno’s favour, adding, “the rulers seem to be throwing their lot with Umno.”
“Where is Raja Nazrin and his father’s assertion that rulers stay above party politics?” he asked.
Nothing made this more obvious than in Pahang, he added, “where the sultan already made it clear: support BN!”
The Pahang sultan, as quoted in a Bernama report last year, has exhorted the public to continue supporting the BN to ensure that development continues in the state.
“What they are doing is against the spirit of constitutional monarchy and constitutionalism. Without doubt the rulers are pressing their own self-destruct button.”
“Just like in 1992 when the Sultan of Johor’s fatal indiscretion eventually saw the rulers’ immunity taken away by parliament,” said Abdul Aziz.
Not seditious
While he understand that the Malay party might deny this and question any attempt to look at the matter, he said, “the principle remains that under the constitution public functionaries and public powers are subject to close public scrutiny.”
“Their exercise must be transparent,” said Abdul Aziz, adding that as of now, the rulers and their pronouncements as head of the faith, has been anything but.
As such, he believes that this issue must be looked at and understood by the public at large.
“There is nothing seditious about this, the matter affect the Muslims who are in the majority in the country.
“They have the right to know. It is our duty to explain these issues to them as pertaining to the rules and roles depicted in the constitution.”
“After all, we are a constitutional monarchy,” he concluded. — Malaysiakini
Translated into Chinese at: http://ccliew.blogspot.com/2010/05/blog-post_02.html
