What if the PM had proclaimed ‘Democratising Malaysia’ a GTP or an NKRA?

Francis Loh looks back and wonders if tens of thousands of Malaysians would have marched in KL on 9 July 2011 had PM Najib promoted greater democratisation.

How could the prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak have got it so wrong?

Shortly after assuming office, he had proclaimed his desire to usher in a 1Malaysia, announced a policy of Rakyat First, Development Now, launched many Government Transformation Plans (GTP) with a variety of goals, claimed various achievements under several National Key Result Areas (NKRA), and released his New Economic Model (NEM) which seeks to liberalise the economy by among others, removing some of the NEP constraints, in order to transform Malaysia from a middle-income nation to a high-income one.

In a visit to the United Nations, and then to the United Kingdom, he had also boasted that his Barisan Nasional (BN) government was a moderate one and called upon the nations of the world to join him in building a global Movement of Moderates. As a result of all these initiatives, he has assumed the appearance of a dynamic, moderate and liberal leader, at home and abroad.

Missed opportunity

So why didn’t he pronounce another GTP or NKRA, in keeping with his 1Malaysia and Rakyat First, to facilitate the demo-cratisation of Malaysia as well?

Or if that’s too far-fetched for Umno and the other BN parties, launch a GTP or NKRA to ‘Modernise the Electoral System’ to bring it in line with political reforms throughout the world? After all, this is being done not only in neighbouring East Asia but in the Middle East as well.

Or, if even that is not acceptable to his Umno/BN team, then forget about having any new GTP or NKRA; simply announce that his BN government would order the Elections Commission to look into ‘alleged complaints’ about the electoral system’ – no need even to be specific phantom voters or postal votes or longer campaign periods. Yes, simply state that the matter would be looked into. Why, there does not even need to be much urgency in dealing with the matter. After all, what’s the status of all those GTPs and NKRAs anyway? Except for the two ministers attached to his Office, who monitors them?

Of course, it would look good if some phantoms were removed, a ‘special action committee’ set up to look into the issue of postal voting, and yet another to do some cost-benefit analysis of going biometric or using indelible ink or even henna.

If one of these seemingly altruistic moves towards democra-tisation had been taken, chances are there would not have occurred that eventful Walk for Democracy, which drew tens of thousands into the streets of Kuala Lumpur on 9 July. And if the march had nonetheless gone ahead, it is likely that it would have only drawn the support of hundreds, perhaps a few thousand, probably from the ranks of the NGOs. The march might have been a very limited affair; after all, the prime minister had promised to look into the matter. So many opportunities to look statesman-like and appear democratic sadly missed!

The rakyat want democracy

Instead, the sledgehammer was used to deal with a completely just demand. Bersih 2.0’s eight-point proposal was not taken seriously – which sparked its call for a Walk for Democracy on 9 July 2011. But the proposed march was declared an ‘illegal gathering’ and the wearing of yellow T-shirts banned. After a meeting with the King, Bersih leaders accepted the government’s offer for the gathering to be held in a stadium. However, its move was stymied. We are now told it had to be a stadium of the prime minister’s choice, outside Kuala Lumpur! And this, after Najib had called upon Bersih 2.0 to shift the gathering to ‘a stadium’, no conditions originally mentioned. Then there was the court order to arrest 91 specified walkers on sight.

Taking the cue from Ibrahim Ali and Perkasa and from the increasingly rabid Utusan Malaysia, the prime minister, in a gathering in Kota Baru on 2 July broadcasted over Radio Malaysia, painted Bersih chairperson Ambiga Sreenaeasan as anti-Malay and anti-Islam. And when this failed to convince Kelantanese and other Malays, he claimed that Bersih’s Walk for Democracy was an attempt to topple the BN government and to seize power via undemocratic means. Pakatan Rakyat’s de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, apparently, was the dalang behind Bersih.

In fact, the authorities could not get their story-line straight. About 30 Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) supporters were detained in Seberang Perai and six of them, including MP for Sungai Siput Dr Jeyakumar Devaraj, were detained under the draconian Emergency Ordinance (EO), which allows for detention without trial. At one stage they were accused of ‘waging war against the King’. For 33 days, the six were held in solitary confinement first in Penang and then in Kuala Lumpur.

There is no doubt that the tens of thousands who took to the streets on 9 July were incensed by the government’s use of the sledgehammer to deal with Bersih’s just demands. The fact of the matter is that the rakyat now want democracy.

Democratising Malaysia ought to be the most important Government Transformation Plan. It is with regards to this National Key Result Area that we should show achievements, not least in reforming the current electoral system. If Najib fails to work on this, it could lead to eventual dismantling of the Barisan Nasional coalition, which his father so painstakingly created.

Dr Francis Loh is honorary secretary of Aliran.

Thanks for dropping by! You are one of an increasing number of readers looking up Aliran for independent analyses and views. We work hard to keep these articles free for all to read. But we do need funds to continue the struggle for Justice, Freedom and Solidarity. To maintain our independence, we do not carry any advertisements; nor do we accept funding from dubious sources. So would you consider making a donation to keep us going - or why not become an Aliran member or subscribe to our FREE newsletters.
(Visited 1 times, 1 visits today)
Francis Loh
Dr Francis Loh served as honorary secretary of Aliran for 20 years and then president of Aliran for five years from 2011 to 2016. He was formerly professor of politics at Universiti Sains Malaysia.

2 COMMENTS

  1. With all due respects Gopal, you obviously have selective memory problem. Please go see a specialist and after that have your eyesight thoroughly checked because you also exhibit extreme myopia. I strongly believe you should also go for a brain scan but who am I to comment on your mental faculties as I am not a doctor?

  2. To be fair in any argument or debate requires strength. Personal inner strength and integrity. Many of those who argue that Malaysia is undemocratic re themselves guilty of the same offence they accuse the government of.

    Take the Nutgraph, Malaysia Kini, Lim Kit Siang the blog and others. All of these claim to be speaking for a “people” a “majority” who aspire to be more democratic. They deny anyone who in the slightest way takes a view that is different or opposed t their own set views. They deny them the right to respond save in exceptional circumstances when challenged. Thats not democracy is it?

    Take the throngs of Bersih who by marching without permits, by writing and blogging, by broadcasting and communicating freely through most available means of communication views that in most cases are rhetoric of a political movement, devoid of the truth in most cases, if thats not democracy then god forbid, what is democracy? the Nutgraph’s censorship or Malaysia Kini’s? or Lim Kit Siangs?

    Claiming the country is less democratic than say Indonesia, or Singapore (the poster boy of the Chinese led Malaysian opposition) is taking the argument a bit too far. It is an invitation to trouble and to a disaster. Thankfully these are a loud minority. Malaysia has 27 million. Even if 1,000,000 marched thats too small to change anything but the size of jails.

    If there are issues with the credibility of the electoral commission and if Ambiga and her groupies have an iota of evidence then why do they not prosecute the matter with their evidence in court?

    If the electoral commission and the electoral system is corrupt and not functioning and needs change, should the five opposition states not give up their seats as an example instead of benefiting from a system they claim is tainted?

    There are double standards in this argument and Ambiga Sreenivasan who has now admitted to receiving foreign funding and illicit clandestine funding from the state government of Selangor for her cause must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

    The country cannot be held ransom to the whims of a reject of the bench in Ambiga Sreenivasan.

Leave a Reply