UMNO Malays are funny people

By admin-s On Jun 10, 2014

Although the Menteri Besar of Johor declares that he remains the chief executive in Johor, it is hard to believe that he will do something His Highness disapproves of. In fact, his tenure as Menteri Besar, and not just as Chairman of the Housing Board, depends on the pleasure of His Highness.

Before real Malays (they are usually moderate in their ways, liberal in their views and love P. Ramlee movies) get upset with the title, let me start by saying that I am not referring to you.

I’m referring only to those hardcore UMNO, Perkasa and ISMA Malays. They are what I describe as “Funny Malays”.

These Funny Malays are willing to sacrifice the institutions of real democracy, such as the Westminster model of constitutional monarchy, for short-term political gains.

With the help of some legal minds of varying quality, they have been able to establish, since 2008, that the Malay Rulers have “real” power not merely on Islamic matters (which in itself involves extensive issues of public concern)—Their Highnesses’ also have the power to do what is necessary to ensure the wellbeing of the Malay race and Islam.

According to UMNO leaders, the Malay Rulers agreed to “grace” the terms of our independence from the British via the Wasiat Raja-Raja Melayu.

According to the present Sultan of Perak and fully endorsed by the Prime Minister and Home Minister, the seven principles of the Wasiat form an integral part of the Constitution, binding Malays and non-Malays alike.

The seventh principle articulates the trust and responsibility of the Malay Rulers towards the “special position” of the Malays. The Malay Rulers are therefore responsible for the protection of the wellbeing of the Malays and, by extension, of Islam.

These principles are to remain forever embedded in our policies and laws. In simple terms, we must always read and interpret the Constitution with this caveat. Fantastic!

Following this new and “enlightened” view of the Constitution, even the Courts are willing to establish new principles of democracy and representative government—and now, we no longer follow the Westminster parliamentary system in terms of policy, practice and constitutional convention.

In the early days of Independence, life was easier and more straightforward as we adopted and observed the Westminster model in its totality. For example: any appointment of a Menteri Besar or State Executive Council member was always dependent on the decision of the party leader whose party won the most seats in the Assembly.

The Menteri Besar and Chief Minister had real power and it was unheard of that any Malay Ruler could exercise direct influence on public policy of any kind.

That is not the case now. Although the words “acting on advice of the Menteri Besar (or Prime Minister)” are clearly used in the State and Federal Constitutions, today the practice is actually the other way around.

The Ruler now decides things and it is wishful thinking for any Menteri Besar to believe otherwise. Just look at what has happened in Terengganu, Perak, Perlis, and Kelantan.

After the Perak case, it’s also clear that the position of Menteri Besar is very much dependent on the pleasure of His Highness both in terms of appointment and removal. Today, if any Menteri Besar or Exco member tells you that the Malay Ruler acts on his or her advice, you can tell them to dream on!