PAS has crossed the limit

I am sorry but PAS, at their recent General Assembly, has crossed the limits of human decency and civility in matters of national multi-ethnic governance.

Malaysia is a Constitutional Monarchy, with the King and Rulers, as guardians of the Muslim and other religions.

On all matters of religion, the rule of law is therefore our supreme authority.

Consequently, the PAS Assembly has amply demonstrated to me that their current leadership cannot be trusted to administer this country at the national level simply because they do not understand this rule of law principle and do not respect the supremacy of the Federal Constitution.

If they cannot accommodate and accept that Sisters in Islam or SIS are a legitimate and legal association under the Registrar of Societies, then they cannot also accept my local church either, because it too is only registered under the Registrar of Societies.

Both our mutual existence is enshrined within the Federal Constitution and our freedoms of religion and association are equally guaranteed under our Rule of Law.

I fail to understand why a group of ‘abused\’ Muslim ladies and their non-Muslim allies cannot seek refuge with care-givers who advocate their case for human rights and dignity for every Malaysian.

Why does the PAS leadership feel so insecure that they need to pass a recommendation asking for a fatwa seeking the dissolution of a group of non-members?

What is it that they really fear? Are they so severely really losing control of their own flock such that they see SIS as a threat to their very existence?

If not, why this urgency to pass such a resolution at the PAS Assembly without even a debate, or discussion, or better still, a discourse or dialogue with SIS? Whose agenda was this anyway?

Why it is that even other the lady members of PAS appear not consulted before this resolution?

Has this therefore become a male-domination agenda pushed through their Ulama faction of PAS? Why was there no \”mesyuarah\” on the subject, the always promised dialogue when unresolved Pakatan Rakyat issues are concerned, but is now not even practiced within PAS!

Human dignity and resultant human rights and responsibilities are God-given and God-ordained.

Men, in most cultures and geographies, are the more dominant and legitimate authority in their homes.

Love and marriage

And, according to Abrahamic traditions, this is another God-ordained view of a rightful and positive influence within marriage.

Therefore, how human beings assume this role and carry out their responsibility defines the nature and culture of most relationships in the home.

Modernity however has allowed many to develop \”their own interpretive theology regarding multiple wives, partners and the like, simply because they can afford it financially.\”

These partners or \”temporary wives\” are now very often proudly called ‘trophy wives.\’

Many years ago I had one boss in the public service who had actually fully educated me on this \”privilege and responsibility of marrying three other wives.\”

He said that the real teaching in Islam is that one can do so only if one can steward the rights and responsibilities to each of them equally and with complete equity.

He personally admitted he could not do this and therefore has remained with the one-wife model.

During my attendance of the SIS Dialogues, I have heard very regularly about Muslim men who discard the older wives and refuse the accountability and responsibility of equitable stewardship amongst the original four.

Moving to the fifth one, in my opinion, is always an abuse of Islamic teaching on multiple wives, since even the Shiite practice of \”temporary wives\” is not really allowed for among the Sunni Muslims.

Therefore, PAS, if they are serious about future national governance, must get their real and visible actions and fractions together.

Politics is the art of the possible, and the going to bed with different partners in the common or expedient temporary or interest is \”self-ist politics.\”

The refreshing new Obama-style ‘inclusive politics\’ always demands truth, honour, authenticity, transparency, equality, true partnerships, and most importantly the third win, against the traditional two win model of two-way mutuality.

Such politics also does not separate intentions from actions; in fact, all unstated intentions are made apparent by the actions of the actors made very visible by media of all forms and the differing views of role players.

Moreover, in Malaysia today, the citizenry are smart enough to read and make common sense of such signs; both actions and non-actions in the so-called public interest.

Objection overuled

What is not in the public interest, but rather in the selfish interest of respective political parties, is seen and called to be such.

Therefore the PAS edict against the SIS is now a classic case in point. Objections have come from across Malaysians of all colours, classes and creeds!

All Malaysians, whether sultans or ordinary citizens, i.e. those who carry Malaysian passports, must work together for the government\’s 1Malaysia Agenda.

While we are still waiting with bated breaths to fully understand this agenda, it is okay and fine to give the new PM his 100 days to \”at least roll out the basic ingredients of this agenda.\”

He is trying very hard and at least I have privately agreed with someone to give that much space and time to the new PM.

The alphanumeric formulation of this agenda is attractive to me. It is, to me, still the same and equally valid Bangsa Malaysia agenda.

The former PM, in fact during his time, even held a national consultation on this agenda organised by the now defunct Socio-Economic Research Unit or SERU.

A book was subsequently published! But, mostly it remained ‘a spoken word or promise\’ in text form and almost never translated into clear and actionable agenda with performance indicators.

Words spoken without the needed consequential action makes for mockery or real intentions, and creates the integrity gap.

Maybe, PAS, instead of picking on SIS, should therefore focus their next triennial Assembly to seriously discuss what their version of 1Malaysia or Bangsa Malaysia agenda would be like.

Most ordinary peace-loving Malaysians want this \”unity agenda\” more than any religiously espoused theory with no follow through.

Premised on the above, their so-called \”Malay unity agenda,\” appears contradictory to their \”coalition agenda of becoming an opposition to Umno. Therefore, maybe they have to reject outright this new and so-called rejuvenated Umno\’s 1Malaysia agenda.

Or, maybe they consider it only the new Umno president\’s agenda.

Words without action

Maybe, it will become like the former president\’s Islam Hadhari Agenda; spoken words with little or no follow through.

The Bangsa Malaysia agenda had its \”essence and spirit, birthed within the Second National Consultative Council,\” and involved most sectors and parties, but not all.

The former was always able to stifle a ‘mutiny on board,\’ without losing sight of his overall direction.

The new PM, perhaps, could make the \”consultation on 1Malaysia\’ be the focus of the BN\’s first so-called National Public Consultation.\”

PAS therefore needs to get their act together on \”their national unity agenda,\” and not just Malay unity at the expense of \”unity with the Sisters, who are Malays too.\”

Hence, Zaid Ibrahim\’s book that is aptly entitled \”Saya pun Melayu.\”

The Pakatan Raykat is still only a very, very loose coalition of like-hearted but not-yet-like-minded parties who want to take over power by the next GE.

They still lack real leadership with a common direction.

Unlike the still burning and soon-to-sink Titanic of BN, theirs is a flotilla of three different sized ships with different captains who have not made very public their ulterior and end-game agendas while sitting together in the common grounds breathing an uncommon air.

The Federal Constitution protects all majority and minority interests under the same Malaysian sun.

PAS is not and never will form the national or federal government at the rate they are going.

Including a ‘symbolic\’ PAS Supporters Clu at the Annual Meeting is simply not good enough, especially when their political demonstrations are evidently reflective of a two-class religious worldview of \”us and them.\”