What do you want from our Rulers?
So, when the Royal family keeps quiet you call them useless and say that the Monarchy should be abolished. But when they try to do something they get whacked, their cars get firebombed, and Molotov cocktails are thrown at their houses.
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin
Tengku Sri Paduka Raja, Tengku Ibrahim Ibni Almarhum Sultan Ismail, uncle to HRH the Sultan of Terengganu, contested the 1990 general election on an opposition ticket, a now defunct party called Semangat 46. At that time Tengku Sri Paduka’s brother, father to the present Sultan, was the Sultan of Terengganu.
At the same time Tan Sri Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, cousin to the then consort of the Sultan of Kelantan, contested in Kelantan while the brother of the Sultan of Pahang, Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Tengku Azlan Sultan Abu Bakar, contested in Pahang, both on a Semangat 46 ticket.
Of course, Tengku Sri Paduka Raja of Terengganu, Tengku Razaleigh of Kelantan, and Tengku Azlan of Pahang, were all heads of Semangat 46 in their respective states and fiercely anti-Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the then Prime Minister.
Back in 1990, out of the nine state Royal households, six were anti-Mahathir while three were pro-Mahathir. Now, when I say Royal households this does not mean the Rulers themselves. For example, the Ruler may be pro-Mahathir while his Crown Prince could be anti-Mahathir. Hence the father and son may not quite share the same political views. So in that sense the Royal households were divided on their political loyalties.
Because it was sensitive for the Rulers or Crown Princes to openly state their political views, they remained silent and did not speak out. However, we knew who from amongst the Rulers and Crown Princes were anti-Mahathir and who were pro-Mahathir.
In some states the Ruler was pro-Mahathir while the Crown Prince was anti-Mahathir. In that sense we could say that all nine state Royal households were anti-Mahathir, depending on whether you want to consider the political leaning of the Ruler himself or that of his Crown Prince.
So, for more than 25 years, the nine Royal families did have a political view. It is only that protocol did not allow the Ruler or his Crown Prince to express these views. They can express them privately to close friends and associates but they were not allowed to officially state their views.
And this, too, has attracted controversy. Those who do not know the internal goings-on in the Palace condemn the Royal Family for remaining silent. They assume that their silence means tacit approval. If you remain silent that means you support what the government is doing. The rakyat overlook the fact that silence does not mean tacit approval but just means protocol demands that they remain silent.
“If the Rulers remain silent then why do we need Rulers?” appears to be the common comment in the social media. “If the Rulers do not speak up for the rakyat then we might as well abolish the Monarchy and turn Malaysia into a Republic. It is a waste of money to maintain a Monarchy that does not fight for the rakyat.”
Well, the Johor Crown Prince has spoken up and now see what has happened. He is being accused of meddling in politics. He is being challenged to step down as the Crown Prince and contest the elections if he wants to become a politician.
When they keep quiet they are accused of being useless but when they speak up they are accused of meddling in politics. Either way the Royal households would face criticism. So should they just keep quiet or should they speak up? Both ways would be detrimental to the position of the Rulers.
So what do you really want from our Rulers, to remain silent or to speak up?
Okay, what if the Rulers do speak up and they speak in favour of the ruling party or the government? Would you regard this as acceptable? Or should they only speak up when the government is wrong and not otherwise?
If we say that the Rulers must remain neutral and not be seen to be taking sides what about their next in line, the Crown Princes? Since they will one day inherit the throne should they, too, remain neutral and not be seen to be taking sides?
What about the other sons, brothers, uncles, etc., to the Rulers and Crown Princes? Since they are not sitting on the throne or in line to the throne should they be allowed to speak up? While the Ruler and his Crown Prince remain silent can the rest of their family members publicly talk about politics?
And how would you know that what these others are saying does not echo the views of the Rulers or Crown Princes? In other words, the Rulers or Crown Princes may remain silent but they ‘speak’ through the other members of the family who are not barred from speaking.
By the way, because Tengku Sri Paduka Raja of Terengganu openly supported the opposition and even contested the general election, they firebombed his car and threw Molotov cocktails at his house. Such was the resentment from Umno when the brother of the then Sultan of Terengganu opposed the government.
So, when the Royal family keeps quiet you call them useless and say that the Monarchy should be abolished. But when they try to do something they get whacked, their cars get firebombed, and Molotov cocktails are thrown at their houses.
Apa lagi Malaysia mahu? Can you all decide once and for all how the Royals should conduct themselves when it comes to politics?
