In the field of study called Public Administration, all public servants and other legal and official appointees of the government of the day are called agents of the government.
These officers are normally gazetted as government officers with specific responsibilities. For example, the Attorney-General is an agent of the government of the day. Even the Armed Forces Chief is an agent of the government. Likewise, the five-star Armed Forces Chief is the Chief Defense Officer.
The AG is the nation\’s Chief Public Prosecutor. That is why the AG can ask the IGP why some cases are not prosecuted. This actually means one agent of the government is questioning another legitimate agent of the government regarding his distinctive jurisdiction; why certain accused are freed and not charged.
The Nurin case accused, the Indonesian lady was the case in point of such an enquiry. I have many other cases and questions for the AG but I am not sure he feels obliged to answer me.
Although, in any democratic system of governance, every citizen has this right to know regarding most matters of public interest. In most developing democracies, the right to know has not yet been adequately acknowledged. This is partly because the media has not yet matured enough to take on independent issues and developed investigative reporting yet.
Recently, we heard also that even Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew reads the Malaysiakini !
That is good advertisement for the non-mainstream Internet newspaper and her style of reporting; even if this endorsement does not mean very much for true democrats!
My thesis about agency in public administration relates to a Star report which stated that the deputy president of MPSJ had instructed Resident Panels to monitor \”illegal worship places\”.
Let us take first things first. Can MPSJ or even the Ministry of Local Government really ask the Resident Panels to do anything?
Can they ask Resident Panels to become agents of the government? Under what authority do they do this? As far as I know, only the Rukun Tetangga (RT) has legal basis to do any kind of monitoring or surveillance on the ground.
Turning residents into spies
We read that the minister in charge is going soon to the Cabinet to ask for even more powers to make the Rukun Tetangga relevant to the concerns for national unity and good governance. That may be an excellent initiative if the goal is to enhance National Unity through neighbourhood watch groups.
Unfortunately though, because of the financial payments made under the RT programmes, over the years the RTs have become a crony system stacked often with \”pro-government-types\”.
I say this even though I was formerly a government servant. In fact, during the SJ2005 Programme, we found that they were both RT\’s and neighborhood watches in Subang Jaya.
The RTs were made up of retired government officers (often appointed by the Local Authority) while the neighborhood watches were made up of elected representatives made up of residents associations or such citizen volunteer gatherings.
The SJ2005 ICT-initiative fared even better with the younger and yuppie-type generations of younger Malaysians participating.
Therefore, today, when the MPSJ says that they have asked Resident Panels or their Area Representatives to become \”spies for the government on illegal places of worship\”, I have a lot of questions.
I hope someone in MPSJ would read my column and please take time to give answers in the spirit of the new Chief Secretary\’s directive that government servants can and must give answers within 36 hours.
Finally, what would the rationale be to require Resident Panels to give feedback on \”illegal places of worship?\”
Is not the more important question whether the MPSJ and the Ministry of Local Government have provided sufficient legitimate places of worship for all the religious groups?
A nationwide proposal
If there are legitimate places of worship, why would anyone in their right minds set up illegal places of worship; other than for very personal or superstitious reason? That would be an example of little shrines individuals put up based on their personal beliefs but which violate public space with personal preferences or even personal convictions.
The Star however reported that MPSJ deputy president Mohamad Yusoff Ghazali has acknowledged that the MPSJ issued the letter, signed by its president Adnan Md Ikhsan.
\”\”We actually received an order from the local government department under the Housing and Local Government Ministry which has issued a similar directive to all local councils in the country on Aug 17. So, it\’s not just the MPSJ alone,\” he said.\”
Now, that makes the whole issue far more complex. If the directive is made to 144 Local Authorities in the nation, the far reaching implications are even more serious.
Can we imagine what will happen if all 144 of them issue directives to their RTs and Neighboorhood Watches (NWs) to \”monitor and enforce\” these illegal places of worship regulation?
In my neighborhood, there are literally hundreds of corner shrines, set up in the neighbourhoods by unknown peoples, but where I see regular worshippers doing the acts of worships.
Are we therefore serious in requiring RTs and NWs to enforce?
What authority do they have when they are not legal and legitimate agents of the government? We may be creating the urban equivalent of Rela groups to illegally seek to enforce rules and regulations about which they have no knowledge of.
Therefore, I agree with the views of Zone 5 chairman Kamarudin Rasol as reported by the Star .
\”I don\’t agree with the proposal. The MPSJ has its own enforcement team and has the power to demolish any illegal structure,\” he said.
\”Our role as zone committees is basically that of an NGO, serving the community and being the eyes and ears of residents. Getting involved in enforcement means that we will be taking over the role of the MPSJ,\” Kamarudin added.
Kamarudin pointed out that this issue was highly sensitive, since it involved religious matters.
A poor planning
He said that if the zone committees were to be involved in any dispute over the illegal shrines, it would affect the harmonious relationship they were trying to cultivate and develop among the residents.
\”We will gladly help the MPSJ in operations against illegal massage parlours and workshops, but will not be partisan on religious matters,\” he said.
Kamarudin said that the solution was for land to be allotted for the building of proper worship places.
He pointed out that the MPSJ has rules on development, requiring that certain premises be set aside for places of worship and schools.
\”Moreover, if the MPSJ wants to demolish any shrine, then an alternative site must be provided. If the council can relocate illegal stalls, they could do the same for the shrines,\” he said.
This is a serious matter and my advice to the Ministry of Local Government is to think through this policy proposal thoroughly before taking it nationwide.
The Rule of Law principle protected and preserved in the Rukunegara is precisely that. We must govern this country based on the rule of law principle. How can the MPSJ or the Ministry of Local Government direct \”non-agents\” to undertake enforcement work?
It is simply and plainly against the rule of law principle. And, especially as this is a matter of religious beliefs, it is even more sensitive.
May we all be careful and conscious about such enforcement, when it was poor planning in the first place that may have contributed to the problem.
