Anwar is subtly assassinating the Monarchy

Raggie Jessy

Anwar Ibrahim today reminded an audience of MPs that Malaysia’s system of constitutional monarchy compels royals to observe the country’s highest law, the Federal Constitution. Well, at least that was how the report went.

“The reminder issued in parliament today addresses claims that Anwar had disrespected the Sultan of Selangor in an acrimonious leadership crisis which blocked the preferred candidate from rising to the office of menteri besar despite clearly having the requisite support of her peers.”

The report by the Malay Mail Online, noted how Anwar alluded to UMNO’s progenitor Onn Jaafar, who he claimed sought to free Malaysians from feudal rule.

Anwar went on further, alluding to Mahathir’s flirtation with Monarchical supremacy. Well, Mahathir did succeed where many others before him copped out; he subjugated Rulers to the full brunt of the law.

Now, as Anwar twisted his tongue around timelines, he got his audience captivated on narrations and innuendos that centred miles off the issue at stake; that Anwar had in fact insulted the Monarchy.

In fact, Anwar had committed treason. I’ve said this before. And here’s why:

1. The Sultan has the final say on who gets to be MB. Anwar, along with DAP, gave the impression that the Sultan doesn’t. So yes, he never said it. But his actions and insinuations insidiously foretold of an intrigue by the Monarchy to deny Wan Azizah her ‘rightful’ place as MB. But Wan Azizah had never commanded the majority, as revealed by FMT and Raja Petra recently; her claim to the rank reeked of perfidy.

2. The purported declarations by 29 assemblypersons in Azizah’s favour, days succeeding Khalid’s audience with the Ruler, couldn’t possibly be construed as an edict worthy for consideration by the Sultan, simply because it wasn’t consequential to and isn’t a Legislative charter. When Khalid boasted of majority support, he did so appropriately, considering that no vote against his favour was ever taken by the Assembly. Withal, Wan Azizah never really did have 29 assemblypersons waiting on her.

3. When the Kajang 2014 first became a public concern, Khalid’s virtues were extolled to such an extent, that he was rendered saviour incarnate, one who purportedly liberated Selangor from the clutches of a venal administration that squandered wealth extravagantly. He was the King of Spades, an economist extraordinaire, who brimmed over Selangor’s coffers by eradicating corrupt practices, subjugating his subordinates to governance of virtue.

But when Selangor was firmly in the clutches of Pakatan post GE13, Khalid was made culpable of Selangor’s religious quandary by Anwar, who accused him of involuntarily throwing the State into a limbo by failing to subdue theological extremism. If Anwar was anyone to go by, Khalid had blossomed into a streak of perfection, insofar as fiscal prudence goes. Yet, he was short of a peoples’ person.

Ironically, these issues concern Selangor’s executive bloc, and not a political party. Granted, Khalid’s performance may have manifest implications on PKR’s proliferation. But Anwar chose to scrutinise Khalid’s credibility in public spheres later, almost taking the piss out of Khalid’s fiscal dexterity, the very virtue he was extolled for evincing. Rather than have assemblypersons vote the MB out, Anwar dragged a reluctant Kit Siang into the fray and assassinated Khalid’s character in the court of public opinion. As I see it, Anwar chose to drop Khalid’s serve in a manner that would vindicate his reputation among the electorate over the Kajang blunder, all in the same breath.

But the plan backfired. As I’ve said, Khalid has proven to be a ton of bricks, simply by being Khalid. When he chose to remain recalcitrant, he virtually recalibrated Anwar’s call on the carpet, the one Anwar feverishly tried to tug from under Khalid’s feet, in futility. That is to say, Anwar’s scathing criticisms against Khalid’s executive direction became a publicly fuelled vendetta against the Constitutional Monarch, the day PKR sacked Khalid.

4. When Anwar sought to disarm Khalid, he bulldozed his way into the State’s Legislative and Executive affairs almost by design, in his capacity as an ordinary PKR member. In the process, Anwar and Kit Siang stirred up a hornets’ nest, positioning their favoured cabal in contempt of the Palace. They committed lèse majesté by undermining a constitutional Monarch, which placed in jeopardy the inviolability and sanctity of the nation’s Monarchical institution. This remains a matter of opinion, one I am firmly in favour of.

That’s right. Khalid had reduced Anwar to a King’s fool. Effectively, Anwar was in contempt of the palace, as he jeopardised political stability by sticking his oars into the State’s legislative chamber, the one His Royal Highness sanctioned to run the state on His behalf.

5. Traditionally, State Rulers seek advice from party stalwarts when appointing MB’s, simply because their choice of candidates includes those most likely to command the confidence of a majority within the Assembly. Notwithstanding, the Ruler is at liberty to single an assemblyperson out for the post of MB, at his discretion, without consulting party stalwarts. This remains an undeniable fact, one Anwar and his henchmen preferred you, the reader, not to know.

6. Anwar alluded to Mahathir, recapitulating on the former Premier’s disarmament of Monarchical privileges. He seemed to insinuate of Constitutional supremacy, a charter revered to even by the Ruler himself.

But allegations against Khalid are tantamount to a crimination of associations, akin to a drumhead trial. By tampering with Executive functions, Anwar and Kit Siang reaped the harvest of treason they painstakingly sowed amidst a torrent of deceit that has the public perplexed on constitutional matters. And deceiving the public on constitutional matters is tantamount to an insidious plot against the Government and the Monarch.