Najib is Silent about Isma Because He’s Afraid

It’s ironic indeed that a former prime minister instead of the current one has come out to tell Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia (Isma) to shut up. And although I don’t trust Mahathir Mohamad’s intent for doing so since the cunning old fox has been the one who started the hatespeak/racistspeak ball rolling, his gesture may at least have some symbolic significance, and those who still listen to him will take note.

On the other hand, the fact that Najib Razak can countenance the scandalous rubbish Isma’s president, Abdullah Zaik Abdul Rahman, has been dishing out of late and keep quiet about it, confirms his lack of courage. What Abdullah Zaik said last week about the Chinese being “trespassers” and about extending hudud to non-Muslims is incendiary, to say the least, and if he has not yet been arrested for sedition, only investigated for it, it must mean that the Government favours Isma and what its president said.

After all, the Government has been quick in charging Opposition politician Teresa Kok for sedition for the ‘Onederful Malaysia CNY 2014’ video she posted on YouTube, although the video doesn’t strike me as being the slightest bit seditious. It is lighthearted and makes no direct references to anyone. The Government’s action shows that it not only doesn’t understand the meaning of satire; it also applies double standards in its use of that archaic Act.

What Abdullah Zaik said, however, which he expressed in utter seriousness, is not a matter to be taken lightly. It was direct and provocative. Worse, what he said about the British colluding with the Chinese to oppress the Malays is concocted falsehood. He even tarnished his own religion by calling for it to be forced on non-believers, something that Islam does not advocate. He obviously meant to anger non-Malays and non-Muslims. It prompted Mahathir to say, “He should keep the comments to himself. They are not doing any good to this country … We don’t need people to instigate racial riots.”

Fortunately, Abdullah Zaik’s remarks did not ignite a racial riot, but it still begs the question: Does Najib want a racial riot to break out first before he will say or do anything? Even when that happens, will he still behave like Nero, who played his lyre and sang while Rome burned?

By keeping silent, he is sending out the signal to Isma and other like-minded extremists that it’s all right to keep saying things that can hurt and/or anger other races. It is precisely because he has never pulled up Perkasa for the outrageous things it has been saying in the last few years that the right-wing NGO has been spouting more and more bile, with its president, Ibrahim Ali, even calling for Bibles to be burnt. And getting away with it.

I understand some self-styled liberals have been saying of late that it’s not right to stop these extremists from saying what they want even if it amounts to hatespeak and racistspeak if we cherish the principle of the right to freedom of expression. Yes, that’s true. I have been a defender of freedom of expression all my life, and I maintain that everyone can say what they want. However, they must be prepared to face the consequences.

More important, freedom in whatever form, not just freedom of expression, must be exercised with responsibility and a sense of decency, plus respect for others.

If we have that sense of decency and respect and we act with responsibility, we would control what we say. For example, we would not say things that denigrated disabled people. We would not laugh at them. That would be considered cruel, immoral even.

We would not say things that could hurt and/or anger other human beings. These could be about the way they look (imagine saying to an ugly man that he is ugly when it’s not called for) or about their religious beliefs or about their race. That’s not being politically correct, by the way; that’s just knowing that there are boundaries we do not cross.

However, there are people who don’t exhibit decency, respect for others and a sense of responsibility. People like Abdullah Zaik and Ibrahim Ali. Their behaviour merely provides the Government fodder to justify maintaining in our legal system a mechanism that restrains people from saying things that can hurt and/or anger others and thereby cause conflict to arise that may even lead to violence. That mechanism is called the Sedition Act. It criminalises, among other things, speech that engenders “feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races”.

I am totally against the Sedition Act and have many a time publicly called for its repeal, not only because it is archaic but mainly because it is anathema to freedom of expression and because the Government abuses it to silence its critics.

We saw how it was used last year to haul in Opposition politicians and civil society activists who participated in the Black 505 rallies and other protests against the Government. We saw it used against the late Karpal Singh of the DAP for saying that the Sultan of Perak could be challenged in a court of law, which indeed was a fact. Nothing seditious about that. And now we have seen it used against Teresa Kok.

Why is it not used against those who have said and done worse, like Ibrahim, Abdullah Zaik, those Umno supporters who have staged protests and threatened another May 13, and the people who organised and spoke at the Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) forum last Tuesday to belittle Christianity and instil in students and Muslims fear and loathing of Malaysian Christians?

Is it going against the principle of freedom of expression to ask that the same treatment be accorded these merchants of hate? Yes, it is. But then as long as the Sedition Act is in existence and the Government continues to wield it, freedom of expression or no, we must still insist that it be used fairly, justly and equally. And if it is not, we must demand that it is.

On that score, the argument of the self-styled liberals is flawed. Are they going to insist till they are blue in the face that the Sedition Act should not be used against the likes of Ibrahim and Abdullah Zaik although it is blatantly being abused against Opposition politicians and other critics of the Government? Where, then, is the justice in that?

And so I reiterate, as long as the Act remains and as long as it is not being wielded fairly, it grates against my sense of fairness, justice and equality. I therefore cannot condone the Government’s practice of double standards.

Najib must act accordingly. He has tried to justify his silence and lack of action, in an interview with Bernama TV last Saturday, by saying that he gives a lot of latitude for the expression of conflicting and discordant views. But this is surely not true. From the examples I’ve mentioned above, it is clear that he has not been so generous with critics of the Government. Even the cartoonist Zunar was charged with sedition in 2010, and when he tried last year to overturn a High Court ruling that decreed that his detention under the Sedition Act was lawful, he failed.

Najib says, “We certainly take action based on the law in the country …”, but he doesn’t take action based on the law against Ibrahim, Abdullah Zaik, the pro-Umno protestors who threatened violence, and Pertubuhan Muafakat Sejahtera Masyarakat Malaysia (Muafakat) President Abdul Karim Omar who warned about the threat of Christianisation at the UiTM forum and made the impossible projection that by the year 2100, there would be more Christians than Muslims in Malaysia.

Najib describes his attitude of non-action as “patience”, as if that would exonerate him, but it doesn’t. In actuality, it is lack of courage. He is afraid to take action against those elements because they are champions of the Malay and Muslim causes and they say things that are supposedly in the interest of the Malays and Muslims. He is afraid of being called a traitor to his race and religion.

That is the real reason. But of course he will not admit it. So the way it looks, perhaps it’s just as well that he keep quiet, because when he opens his mouth, he often can’t seem to tell the truth.