During the course of an FB
chat, a friend asks for my comments on a former reporter colleague’s posting of
choosing between peace and prosperity, or freedom, rights, integrity and
transparency.
In the Malaysian context,
this is supposedly a Hobson’s choice.
As it was close to
midnight, I yammered some incomprehensible reply before logging off but an article on the massacre of 57 people, including 31 journalists, on a November morningthree years ago in Maguindanao got me thinking again on the question.
Yes, we have been blessed
with relative – the main blemish being the May 13, 1969 riots - peace and
prosperity throughout the 54 years of the nation’s existence.
Why couldn’t we, then, put
in place principles that upholds one's freedom and rights, governing integrity and
transparency – and if I may add – moral and ethics into the way we administer
the country?
Can’t we have both? What
is it about the latter that is so threatening to the former that co-existence
is supposedly impossible?
We are not talking about unbridled freedom and rights but in the context of the proper adherence to the Rule of Law; i.e.
where EVERYONE knows exactly where the boundary lies and the penalties for transgressing this line.
Realistically, it is here
that we have been found wanting for quite a while now with seemingly two sets
of rules being in play: one for the politically favoured and, another, for the
rest of us.
That, and the seeming
politically-expedient way of our execution of some laws: the most recent being
the charging of a Border’s bookstore staff over the banned Irshad Manji’s book.
At least, there is a
Judicial Review on the matter.
The retroactive nature of
the alleged offence and the seriousness of its outcome (for the staff’s
livelihood and freedom) means that there shouldn’t be any other way forward
than to contest the charge brought against her under the Syariah Enactment.
So, can it be argued that
the Rule of Law is alive and well as such?
Before we come to the said
conclusion, do remember that Borders is owned by Berjaya Books and in Malaysia,
Berjaya is a biggie.
There shouldn’t have been
a charging in the first place had the Rule of Law really been adhered to.
All things said, I have to
admit that the country is a relatively peaceful place to live and work in.
Not necessarily play, though,
(pun intended) – what with the, ahem, increased perception of lawlessness
apparent amongst some of the populace.
What is also true,
however, is that some of the natives are restless; a sentiment simmering just
below the all-glossy,shiny surface of the nation’s peace and prosperity facade.
Restless over perceived
and actual bias in the implementation of national policies, over the
seemingly accepted culture of rent seeking as a valid method of earning a
living, over a more apparent division of class on top of the already well
entrenched polarization of race, over the increasingly burdensome chase of
economic over social well being…
Perhaps these are just the
middle class / urban suburban / Gen X manic responses to the crushing economic
malaise of late.
Or mere ravings of the disgruntled,
treasonous ingrates as purported by some of our politicians.
Sadly, the peace we’ve
held for so long did not see the putting into place a system of governance
where such grievances could have been amicably tackled.
I’ve often asked this question:
how and when did the country go off tangent in its nation-building to come to
this sad state?
When did we make peace and
prosperity, and governance, rights, integrity and transparency a Hobson’s Choice?
To some, this was when the
Doctor was in the house.
Was it? Why did we let it
be so?
Did we want our people to
be forever in hand outstretched for crumbs mode?
The Tyranny of Thanos the Titan |