On one hand, we have leaders who view “civil liberties” as something alien. They argue that we cannot “afford” such “westernised” practices and that our multiracial harmony would be imperilled by too much freedom.
According to them, we need to protect the interests of the whole community. This perspective remains embedded in government-thinking despite the ground-breaking Malaysia Day announcements.
The alternative school of thought posits that we need these freedoms to challenge the growing corruption plaguing Malaysia.
Indeed, there are many who would argue that a more independent media and judiciary would impact the economy positively because they would lead to a more efficient distribution of government funds and capital.
Interestingly, much of the political turmoil we’ve witnessed globally over the past year — from Tunis to New York, Cairo and Wukan — is also interconnected with my theme.
Essentially, all the demonstrations grew out of a gnawing sense of injustice as ordinary people, frustrated by their impotence, rebelled against unresponsive and brutalising authorities.
It’s worth considering whether Zine al-Abedine Ben Ali and Hosni Mubarak would have survived had they invested more in civil liberties? Would the retribution of the masses have been so harsh had people been free to voice their concerns? Would the young Tunisian vegetable-seller have set himself alight if he had an alternative?
It’s worth remembering that when the people have no legal recourse the only way forward is to topple the existing regime. Viewed in this context, civil liberties should be regarded as an important guarantor of political stability.
Over the past few decades, Malaysians have accepted limited civil liberties in return for social peace and prosperity. Our “Asian values” formulation prioritised the community’s interests above the individual.
This worked well enough when the economy was growing and internal checks and balances prevented undue injustice.
Unfortunately, a stalling economy has brought out our inherent weaknesses, including corruption and mismanagement. Moreover, there’s a mounting sense — whether true or not — that elite groups are securing enormous personal benefit by manipulating the system.
At the same time, there’s also a tendency in Malaysia to see the powerful in our society as being beyond the reach of justice — acting with impunity whilst others are on the receiving end of the full brunt of executive power.
This leaves much of the rest of the population feeling distrustful of the government’s intentions. Any society where justice only favours the powerful is unsustainable.
Moreover, the democratisation of information via the Internet now means that the elite can no longer hoodwink the majority.
If this situation continues unchecked, Malaysia’s social contract will crumble even further.
Our leaders, particularly from Umno need to remember that Malaysia is not the Middle East. At its best, Umno possesses a degree of legitimacy as well as a democratic tradition that can be revived and strengthened. Arab regimes — especially Saudi Arabia — are an inappropriate governance model for us to follow.
The party’s leaders ought to be working to boost fairness and dignity in our society. Economic transformation cannot exist without political reform.
Moreover, democracy is not just about voting once every five years. It is also a way of life, of protecting the interests of all — whether the majority or minority. It’s true that faith and culture are important, but democracy also means accepting people and beliefs you may not necessarily agree with.
At the end of the day, it all comes back to trust. Civil liberties can only exist in societies (especially in diverse ones like ours) where governments and people trust each other and themselves.
We need to be able to believe that our fellow Malaysians will not use their freedoms to incite hatred or destabilise society. I for one truly believe that we are ready for this great responsibility right here and now.
As Thomas Jefferson once said: “I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences of too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.”
No comments:
Post a Comment