The mutation of Tunku Aziz (Part 1)

5
62

Martin Jalleh digs up an article written by Tunku Abdul Aziz in 2009 – and finds some startling contradictions with his position today. How times have changed.

Martin, a regular contributor to Aliran, writes:

Below are excerpts of an article written by Tunku Aziz. It appeared in Malaysian Insider (of which he was then a columnist) on 6 August 2009 and the following day on Lim Kit Siang’s blog.

No comment on the man, whom I once held in very high regard for and quoted quite often, is really necessary. The excerpts of his article and his glaringly contradictory stance today are sufficient to reveal with utmost transparency the telling tragedy of the man.

(The paragraphing has been edited for convenient reading.)

Demonstrations: A fundamental right of citizens

by Tunku Aziz

Minutes before writing this article, I had just finished reading, for the second time after a lapse of some years, F W De Klerk’s “The Last Trek – A New Beginning.” He was, of course the President of South Africa who dismantled apartheid and gave the people of that troubled nation a new democratic constitution which saw the once proscribed African National Congress in the seat of power after winning the general elections in 1994.

I mention all this because in spite of the fact that the Republic of South Africa had been under a state of emergency and under siege, De Klerk, in 1989, a few months before his inauguration as President, made a conscious political decision to legalise protest demonstrations that had been made illegal until then, much to the consternation of his security advisers. They thought it was madness on his part given the circumstances prevailing at the time. Why did he do what he did? Let him tell us in his own words:

We were faced with the fact that it would be impossible to avoid the gathering of thousands of people committed to the march. The choice, therefore, was between breaking up an illegal march with all the attendant risks of violence and negative publicity, or of allowing the march to continue, subject to the conditions that could help to avoid violence and ensure good order.

These were important considerations, but none of them was conclusive. The most important factor, which tipped the scale, was my conviction that the prohibition of powerful protests and demonstrations could not continue. Such an approach would be irreconcilable with the democratic transformation process that I was determined to launch and the principles of a state based on the rule of law, which I wanted to establish.

In terms of the security and public order situation then obtaining in South Africa, and the situation in Malaysia today, where peaceful demonstrations are illegal, the two situations do not bear the remotest resemblance.

The justification trotted out with regular monotony by the government is so outrageously dishonest as to insult our intelligence. A government that sees a need to continue to impose an undemocratic law has no place in a parliamentary democracy.

For F W De Klerk, the man who worked himself out of a job, it was nothing more than “restoring what was regarded throughout the world as a basic democratic right”. (Emphasis Tunku Aziz’s)

Perhaps De Klerk’s most inspiring statement in defence of democratic principles is “…..no vision of the future can justify any government to ignore the basic human rights of the human beings involved. No cause is so great that we should allow it to dilute our sense of justice and humanity”. (Emphasis Tunku Aziz’s)

On that note, as our legal friends would say, I rest my case. Now over to our self-proclaimed reformist prime minister. (Please take note of what he called Najib then! – Martin Jalleh)

Sign Aliran's 'Save our Democracy" petition
Sign Aliran's petition calling for a review of the decision to grant Riza Aziz a DNAA
Thanks for dropping by! The views expressed in Aliran's media statements and the NGO statements we have endorsed reflect Aliran's official stand. Views and opinions expressed in other pieces published here do not necessarily reflect Aliran's official position.

Our voluntary writers work hard to keep these articles free for all to read. But we do need funds to support our struggle for Justice, Freedom and Solidarity. To maintain our editorial independence, we do not carry any advertisements; nor do we accept funding from dubious sources. If everyone reading this was to make a donation, our fundraising target for the year would be achieved within a week. So please consider making a donation to Persatuan Aliran Kesedaran Negara, CIMB Bank account number 8004240948.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
5 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Anthony
Anthony
22 May 2012 12.28pm

Lee Boon Teng, 30 million UMNO members,ahh! Wah! Malaysia’s population must be 70 million including the dead!

Isma
21 May 2012 11.35am

The telling tragedy of the man is an apt description. For an individual of such (former)stature what changed his thinking should not be what might change that of a lesser person, ie financial inducement. One really has to wonder, what (presumeably big) issue is involved?

jimmychan
jimmychan
21 May 2012 10.24am

Looks like me, sounds like me, definitely not me.

Lee Boon Teng
21 May 2012 7.23am

…Aliran has records?
Good for historians
…but today’s politics care more for cash. Voters get RM500. Enough for a month. Yes, vote BN.
Aliran has just 45 members. UMNO has 30 million members..from here, there and nowhere! BN has only Chua Solek (Solek?)

Aliran
Aliran
21 May 2012 12.02pm
Reply to  Lee Boon Teng

Aliran has close to 200 members.