Last week the prime minister gave three statements of operational policy advice to the nation. The contents, as interpreted and reported by the New Straits Times (NST), the Umno-controlled newspaper, were more misinformation than information on one core issue: The Article 11 coalition and their related issues. I totally disagree with the first two statements as reported by NST but wholeheartedly agree with the last and third one.

In the world of multimedia and communication, it is said that \’information is power\’ but I do hope that we also realise that misinformation and disinformation can become the abuse of power and lead to both chaos and ruin.

Mr Prime Minister, I believe that your first two statements, as reported, were not based on facts but rather on misinformation, or worse still, disinformation. In my view, the net result is that there was great disappointment among at least 50% of Malaysians, especially the non-Muslim Non-Malays (about 40%) who supported you in the last election and helped give you 92% of the votes. After all you promised that you are prime minister of all Malaysians, including Non-Muslims and moderate Muslims.

Let me start with your most recent statement, with which I fully agree. The Sunday Times (July 30) summarised your speech at the Yayasan Budi Penyayang Malaysia function as saying that \’Love conquers all\’. I cannot but agree.

In fact, the Bible puts an even stricter preamble condition that \’we not only must speak through love but we must also speak the truth in love\’, because God is love. Quoting you Sir, the NST reported: \”Love means caring, never disappointing anyone and always helping those in need.\” In fact, for those interested in this subject of love, please read I Corinthians 13 for an excellent exposition in almost poetic form to better appreciate the full context of Christian text about Agape kind of love.

Love is the defining value of the Christian faith, for without love we are simply a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal, declares the Bible. Therefore, I want to completely extol the on-going work of not just the Penyayang Foundation but all those who carry on in the ministry of extending love and caring in various ways throughout the country. Maybe this Love Foundation can and should become the umbrella civil-society group of all such ministries of mercy, love and caring. Something for Minister Sharizat Abdul Jalil to consider.

Stop talking

But, going back to the prime minister\’s two other statements reported by the NST . The first appeared on Wednesday (July 26), the day of the weekly Cabinet meeting, after he attended the Umno supreme council meeting on Tuesday evening. NST reported that he demanded all activities relating to \”the Inter-Faith Commission (IFC) to cease immediately\”.

\"\"

The NST went on to say, \”Abdullah, who was speaking to reporters after chairing an Umno supreme council meeting, was commenting on the Article 11 meeting in Johor Bharu recently which was disrupted by a few thousand people, including members from Umno Youth and PAS.\”

The facts were wrong even at my first reading. To me, as a public servant of almost 30 years, the prime minister could not have been talking about the Article 11 meeting, or at least he may not have fully understood what the contents of the Johor Bharu Article 11 meeting were all about. Why do I say so? The prime minister had just finished an Umno meeting, which means those who briefed him were not objective and professional government servants but Umno members, maybe even some Cabinet ministers, but more as party loyalists and not truth-of-the-matter-seekers.

For all I know, there may even have been some government servants, as some are wont of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, but they would still have been speaking with the voice of Umno and not the government of the day. The Cabinet, as the Executive, had not yet met until Wednesday. But, whoever briefed the meeting may have either misinformed or confused the facts regarding the Article 11 Johor Bharu meeting. They did not really appreciate the difference between the Article 11 issue and the IFC issue. The IFC issue, related to Article 3 of the Federal Constitution is now almost as good as dead and nobody I know is talking about it, for now at least.

In all likelihood, the Umno meeting may have talked about the reaction of the Pembela Group of more than 50 Muslim organisations that had come together at the Federal Territory Mosque, in the spirit of the Badai Group in Penang, and had gathered to \’protest against the threats against Islam\’.

Based on the malaysiakini report, there were in fact at least 10,000 people gathered at the mosque. Malaysiakini even carried pictures of some of those who attended. According to the report, it included Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah. To my knowledge, the NST did not report either of these events.

Moreover, the fact is there were only about 500 protesters at the Johor Bharu event and it was a relatively peaceful event, with credit to the organisers and the police. Therefore, it is not difficult for me to conclude that the \’uninformed or misinformed NST reporter\’ rather mistakenly develops his own storyline and almost creates a non-government policy on the matter. To me this was confirmed by Minister of Information Zainuddin Maidin who later clarified that \”there are no special newspapers in this country.\” Obviously this story too was not carried by NST .

Stop publishing

Finally on Friday (July 28), the same NST reporter again now \’fully develops the wrong pet hypothesis\’ and reports instead that, \”The government wants the media to voluntarily stop printing or broadcasting issues related to religious matters. Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said that the Cabinet decided on Wednesday that media orgnisations be advised against such topics in the wake of tension over Article 11\’s forums on the freedom of religion.\”

According to the NST report, the issue has moved from the IFC to the media reports over the Article 11 story. What is even more interesting is that the minister of information talks about ethnic relations and related reporting and nothing about the Article 11 coalition. That was what the media was cautioned about, not Article 11 and their meetings!

What then suddenly happened to the so-called IFC issue which the Badai group (motivated by PAS supporters) and their supporters, including now Umno Youth and supreme council members? The same reporter, quoting the prime minister, restates the original \’thesis\’ of the Badai group wrongly started in Penang, and which now even former Bar Council presidents Zainur Zakaria and Sulaiman Abdullah are championing under the Pembela umbrella. They have their issues but it has very little to do with Article 11 but rather whether Article 3 and the foundation intentions were being diluted by the Federal Court cases and the related arguments.

The details of these are potentially sub-judicial to the Federal Court and High Court cases, and therefore the police should investigate whether the former Bar Council presidents are in violation of judicial prudence on the matter, without being colour-blind on the matter, as per my last article.

To understand these issues please read two sets of statements on the matter which were also carried by malaysiakini . The best and clearest statement about the two issues (about IFC and Article 11) have been made by two equally prominent people, namely Ramon Navaratnam as chairperson of an independent policy think tank under Asli and Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, the president of rights group Hakam, who has been personally involved in both the original IFC process and the current Article 11 coalition of civil society groups.

The coalition and its supporters include individuals like me who were among the 18,000 who signed the petition directly to the PM. Thankfully however, when asked by a reporter on the Article 11\’s formal request to meet and talk to him about the matter, Abdullah said that he would wait for the right time to meet them. Somehow, I believe that the PM is sincere about this. So, I appeal to the Article 11 coalition, let us wait for the PM\’s right and appropriate time, for then we can also speak the truth in love, as he will be willing to listen.

The dangers

Now, to highlight the dangers of information, misinformation and disinformation to the minister of information, a point I made to the then secretary-general of the ministry about seven years ago about the dangers of multimedia communication. All three forms of information come at you with lightning speed, but how does an individual discern what is true, right and accurate? Let me therefore quote an actual, real and true example but of the virtual variety.

Starting Friday, I began receiving, first phone calls from friends, the first from a Bishop of the Church, inquiring whether it was a fact that the Lina Joy case verdict was coming out \’tomorrow\’? I checked with one of the lawyers involved in the case and promptly informed the bishop regarding the non-truth of the matter. Next, I received the same request from a journalist with one of the leading newspapers. Again, I confirmed the non-truth of it plus reasoned that \”tomorrow was a Saturday and the government does not work on Saturdays.\” Moreover, one of the lawyers of the case knew nothing about it.

Now, Mr Prime Minister what is the potential and real problem we are facing? If misinformation and disinformation can travel this fast, much faster than real, true and accurate information, we can have the potential problem of the Titanic.

By the time the captain of realised that the natural hazard of the iceberg was in its way, it was too late to change the course of the ship. Then most, if not all, can only plan to abandon the ship. Many will plan to buy their way out, bribing their way if necessary, but most ordinary and simple people like those caught in the Israeli cross-fire in Beirut, will simply become \’collateral damage\’ as the American media has reduced them to be.

Dear Mr Prime Minister, my best Muslim friend gave me a book called Unspeak by Steven Poole. The subtitle reads \’How Words Become Weapons, How Weapons Become a Message, and How that Message Becomes Reality\’. Maybe your Cabinet should also read this book and really begin to appreciate the dangers of the media-created \’virtual realities\’ which gain a life of their own before you as the captain can even contemplate to change the course of our ship. In the American case, the biggest \’virtual silver bullet is the now-infamous WMD\’. More importantly, we need responsible reporting and journalists who check their facts and not participate in spreading rumours or at least misinformation.

Face to face

Mr Prime Minister, it may be therefore time for you to meet face to face with the Article 11 group and you will be pleasantly surprised that they are not as evil as some people make them out to be. Then you will meet your own MP for Kota Baru Zaid Ibrahim, another lawyer Harris Ibrahim, who has a very rational and intelligent legal mind, Malik Imtiaz, whose logic, knowledge and arguments you cannot fault (between all three are Muslim lawyers), Ivy Josiah, the gentle but astute potential member of Penyayang and maybe even Norhayati Kaprawi, the member of Sisters of Islam whom I am sure your daughter knows well. Finally, there will also be Dr Cyrus V Das, the lead Federal Court lawyer in a number of the apex court cases and leading Professor of Constitutional Law in Malaysia, Shad Saleem Farouqi.

Are you serious in telling all of them \’Not to Talk\’ about Article 11? That is their livelihood and they earn a living with Constitutional cases and case-law. And, do you really believe that they are all intent on trying to create their own IFC after you have suggested otherwise? Can they, really? If you do read the media reports about what you say, you cannot be really serious and still claim to represent about 50% of Malaysians who did support you at the last election.

I am really sorry and beg to disagree with you on this matter. The Article 11 coalition was formed simply to defend human rights already agreed to, protected and preserved under the Federal Constitution and not to demand for new rights. No one is questioning the place of Islam in that document of destiny, as Prof Shad calls it. Many of the Article 11 supporters are Muslims and first class citizens of this country. It is because they love the country that they are prepared to speak the truth in love. As you already know, many of the Article 11 related issues and cases have landed in court and some are in fact in the Federal Court. Should we not allow the Blind Lady of Justice to take her course, without trying to color or threaten her mind or heart?

Please, let us not be confused between the two issues and do not allow \’political opportunists\’ to \’reinterpret the issues for their own benefit\’. I believe that the Article 11 coalition will probably wait to meet you, but you must also warn misinformants, disinformants and law-breakers to cease their activities, for they are playing with the fire of emotions. Otherwise, you would lose your credibility with 50% of the Malaysians who still support you. God Bless Malaysia.