Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Malaysia
produced by the Christian Federation of Malaysia, he said he found the arguments in favour of the use of the word by Christians strong and cogent. But he did not dwell on the controversy and moved on to talk about the need for dialogue. Anyway, you would expect the Catholic Church's diplomat to support the position of the local church on the use of the word "Allah" in the same way that you would expect the US ambassador to support freedom of speech and free and fair elections. Did the archbishop try and influence the case before the court? No. The Catholic Church is the plaintiff, not the Christian Federation of Malaysia. He was not commenting on the case but on the leaflet produced to explain the issue to Christians. Instead, of a rational approach to his comments, the tone of the discourse was set by Datuk Ibrahim Ali and Datuk Hasan Ali, two small fry in a puddle. They and Umno bloggers wanted action to be taken against the Archbishop and for him to be booted out for interfering in the internal affairs of Malaysia. Save for Datuk Paul Low who argued logically that a diplomat is entitled to his opinion and to make a case for the country or organisation he represents, Umno ministers and politicians also followed the herd. Instead of urging for calm and being honest, they poured more oil on the fire. Not one of the Umno politicians saw the comments for what they were: an honest response to a question from reporters who operate from the
mistaken belief that the Allah issue is the singular issue which is of interest to Christians in Malaysia. So the Archbishop was summoned and urged to be sensitive about a case before the courts. And the Malay right-wing is celebrating, believing that they have triumphed in the battle of religions. Sadly, there are no victors, only losers. And the biggest loser is Malaysia. Because missed was an opportunity by ruling politicians to lead a debate and bring it to a conclusion without rancour and hysteria. Missed was an opportunity to reclaim the space abdicated to shrill voices of the fringe. Just a few words on the usual crutch of the BN official when faced with a difficult issue - the sub judice argument - is not valid. Sub judice applies mainly to the legal system where there are jury trials, and where the jurors can be influenced by what they read in the papers. But judges decide cases in Malaysia and if a judge is influenced by views outside the court room so easily, he really should not be on the Bench. But really it is not only the Marino episode that raises troubling questions on the ability of our politicians to lead. Just listen to Domestic Trade, Cooperatives and Consumerism Minister Datuk Hasan Malek's advice to Malaysians on how to tackle the spike in the price of chicken. Avoid chicken, and eat fish or meat, he said, and in the same breath blaming profiteering for the sharp increase in chicken prices. Shouldn't his ministry's enforcement officers be taking action against the crooks? So if the price of other commodities shoots through the roof due to
monopolistic or other unfair practices, should we also take Hasan's advice? If by now you are in despair, do not look to Parliament for any respite from the dumbing down of this country. There is Datuk Bung Mokhtar Radin making a case why it is perfectly normal for Umno politicians to seek contracts through direct negotiation or asking Air Asia X CEO Azran Aziz to leave Malaysia for criticising Utusan Malaysia's incendiary post-election coverage. July 18, 2013.