IT is dangerous that Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin is asked to “sacrifice” his home minister, Datuk Seri Hamzah Zainudin, and international trade and industry minister, Datuk Seri Mohamed Azmin Ali, to form a bipartisan government.
The above idea apparently originated from Umno leader Datuk Mohd Puad Zarkashi, and seconded by Senator Liew Chin Tong of DAP.
One must understand that Malaysia functions on the system of constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy. But, the cabinet is premised on the Anglo-Saxon tradition of the Whitehall government that is consistent with the tradition of the Commonwealth, too. When the prime minister fails to earn the consent from His Majesty and his brother rulers, it is a given that the prime minister and the whole of his cabinet have failed. What more when His Majesty’s decree amounts to a royal rebuke.
The latter implies the cardinal principle of collective responsibility, which is why when a minister disagrees with His Majesty’s government, in other words, the cabinet, he or she is obliged to immediately resign from his or her position, without which the cabinet will have an unruly minister.
Asking for the heads of Hamzah and Azmin will also set a precarious precedent: when the prime minister fails to get consent from His Majesty and the Conference of Rulers, the colleagues of the prime minister can be immediately transformed into sacrificial lambs.
Here are the strategic risks for many generations to come. First and foremost, the prime minister can remain in office as a quasi-dictator. When something goes wrong, he can sack or dismiss those he dislikes, or those who are willing to have themselves removed, to resign to the back scene, to remain as the “black hand” of informal influence. In other words, the buck doesn’t ever stop here, but somewhere else, of my choosing and however convenient.
Once the suggestions of Puad and Liew are accepted, to what extent can they defend the democracy of Malaysia that must be based on the spirit of open society, transparency and accountability? The simple and straightforward answer to these two gentlemen is, they cannot. In fact, their ideas will skew the government forever, and in more ways than one, skew the spirit in which the king and Conference of Rulers had made their decision. Neither the king nor the Conference of Rulers asked for anyone to be removed. His Majesty and the Conference of Rulers, indeed, offered to maintain the system of checks and balances. A wise decision indeed.
Assuming for a moment the likely outcome that Hamzah and Azmin fight back on the grounds of unfair dismissal, or worse, they gang up to throw a spanner in the works of the new government from which they have been excluded. The stability of His Majesty’s government will always be undermined through a regular trove of gossips, poison-pen letters, and potentially, even race-baiting demonstrations. They may even collaborate and conspire to form a new government by enticing various members with new promises of portfolios and positions. The cycle of abuse of power would just continue.
Can Puad or Liew ensure that these ugly scenarios won’t occur until the next general election, which is due by 2023? The answer is, no. If the answer is in the negative, why should they start throwing various unproven ideas at the direction of the media or the current prime minister, who has yet to resign as this is written?
More importantly, sacking the home and trade ministers requires a strong locus standi. The argument offered by Puad and Liew is that these are the two “maestros” behind Muhyiddin’s every move to declare a national emergency, which, as mentioned, was turned down by His Majesty and the Conference of Rulers on October 25. Now, Malaysia is based on the rule of law and evidence. Where are the principles of the two?
Lastly, Puad and Liew are from Umno and DAP, respectively. They have never seen eye to eye. If their “suggestions” are somehow accepted by Muhyiddin, the Chinese would stand accused of trying to influence the affairs of the government, while the Malays – not all of whom support the trio of Muhyiddin, Puad and Liew to begin with – would see this as a gross interference in the regal responsibilities of His Majesty and the esteemed Conference of Rulers.
Bipartisanship is important, as acknowledged by His Majesty and the Conference of Rulers, but it can be exercised bill by bill – not in the form of Killing Bill by Quentin Tarantino.
Puad and Liew have failed to follow through on the half-baked logic of their suggestions, which is surprising, granted their years in government. – The Vibes, October 26, 2020
Phar Kim Beng is founder of Strategic Pan Indo Pacific Arena (strategicpipa.com), which studies and promotes regional cooperation, especially in the Indo-Pacific area
