The Gospel of Nazri

This is my third \’worldview analysis\’ article regarding the implicit assumptions that \’public officials\’ make regarding the nature of man in their policy statements about issues of national interest.

The focus of this article relates to the Sunday Times interview with Minister in the Prime Minister\’s Department and defacto law minister Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz.

The minister reveals his interpretation of the theology of Umno about man, but also \’re-presents\’ what is arguably the Umno official position on the matter. The minister is also the Umno deputy whip in Parliament.

One wonders whether this is also the Barisan Nasional\’s official theology!

The minister uses the Umno media to explain the official stand that the party has taken against the Johor Bahru MP Shahrir Abdul Samad on the matter of his support for the opposition\’s motion and subsequent resignation from the Backbenchers Club (BBC) chairmanship.

To quote Nazri from the interview:

\”If you are not affiliated to any party, then you can vote with your conscience. That should not be a problem. Right now in Parliament, the only person who can do this is Sandakan MP Chong Hon Min who is an independent.\”

That, I take is the official theology of the nature of man and the extent of \’re-presentation\’ allowed by BN (or is it only Umno?) Members of Parliament.

This is the \’gospel according to minister Nazri\’. If we take the minister seriously and follow his logic blindly, no motion ever presented by the opposition is ever worthy of support; even if it is a truly public interest issue like the last one, because of the blanket rule of the BN whip machinery.

Therefore, even the chief BN whip could not argue and ask Shahrir not to resign because he has committed a \’mortal sin\’. Shahrir must be committed to \’purgatory\’ until he repents and only \’God\’ can reinstate him!

But who is \’god\’ in this theology? The only ONE who can reinterpret such \’public theology!\’.

Blind supporters

Are we then to feel sorry for Shahrir about his predicament for standing up for integrity and principles for which he has been getting overwhelming support from all \’Joe publics\’?

He frankly does not need any of our sympathy; as he has always chosen to live by his conscience in his party career, and it looks like the high priest of BN/Umno\’s interpretation bureau has ruled against his favor.

The only real constituency who can make the MP look right is the ordinary people who voted for him as their representative. But, as it is obvious, as in Singapore, so it is here. Only the \’party blind supporters\’ can be slotted for elections as official candidates.

Presumably Shahrir\’s candidacy is history if he continues on this recalcitrant track! Within Umno presumably, one\’s conscience is never an acceptable argument for self-defence. That is only good within the Western notions of democracy. Such \’free human rights\’ should never be tolerated as this guarantees freedoms not intended by \’these gods\’. Really, who says so?

I disagree as a Constitutional Malaysian.

Article 11 of the Malaysian Constitution guarantees freedom of religion and thus a freedom of conscience. In fact, Article 11 is specifically about the freedom to practice a religion of your personal choice. That matter of the lack of \’choice\’ is the core issue in a number of cases in the Federal Court these days.

Universal definitions

Moreover, we are a signatory to the Declaration of Human Rights, even if we have not ratified some of the provisions. As champions of a progressive civilisation and the chair of both the OIC and NAM, Malaysia has little choice to nationally reinterpret these universally agreed freedoms in any flimsy national way and in our own mould.

What more with the most recent International Centre for Cyber Terrorism announced in Texas, and supported by both the Americans and the Russians, we have even less \’freedoms\’ of discretionary interpretation away from universal definitions!

Even nations like Russia and China have in deed come a long way from their \’communistic and fascist definitions of man\’ as the blind followers of certain party-lines and theologies! How then can Umno and BN be preaching such a gospel and theology of man, according to Nazri?

Maybe BN needs to undergo a self-analysis and re-invention as did PAS and DAP most recently. Umno has also tried hard with self-change but \’change is more legacy-driven than principle-driven\’, as Shahrir is now making evident through his stand for principles.

Outdated structure

The former prime minister cried publicly over this issue twice! But, as a \’traditional supporter\’ of BN, I honestly fear that the structure and framework of BN is today out-of-date and cannot face the realities and challenges of the future.

Cardinal among them is the recognition and acceptance that the universally agreed values of human dignity which define our common commitment for the cause and destiny of man. Deny these as \’rascal regimes\’ like North Korea and Burma have tended to; and you will slowly find the international community turning their backs on you.

Even a developing small nation like Nepal with a despot King is learning that a people\’s democracy movement can be very powerful in mobilising public sentiment against any illegitimate regime of power and influence.

We all need to learn for all this, as have ruling parties in much larger democracies like in India and thus have reinvented themselves for the greater good of the larger majority.

My prayer is that we all learn the lessons from history and international politics well. All regimes that abuse power in the name of democracy and influence, have found the same fate, over time!