COMMENT | I am not really a fan of police reports lodged by members of the opposition because nothing ever seems to come of these reports but the recent report lodged by DAP members with regards to the prime minister’s speech at the recent Umno general assembly is an absolute delight. I do not think anything will come of it but it points to the hypocrisy and mendacity of the system where people are warned not to make “sensitive” remarks but the establishment is given a free hand to run down anyone it thinks is a threat to its hegemony.

Segambut MP Lim Lip Eng exposes not only the mendacity of Umno but the hypocrisy of the whole system when he reminds people that if the lies of DAP being anti-Malay and anti-Islam were true, that would mean that the royal institution was complicit in collaborating with DAP in promoting an egalitarian and secular state.

I really dig it when opposition politicians bring forth uncomfortable questions into our public spaces. For instance, if DAP were really anti-Malay and anti-Islam, this would mean that Penang is governed by a political party which is a threat to the Malay community and Islam but they do so without any sanction from the state which is supposed to safeguard both. Doesn't Umno care that the Malays in Penang are “bangsat” in their own lands?

This would also mean that the royal houses in states where DAP enjoys support are complicit in supporting the anti-Malay and anti-Islam agenda of DAP. Is Umno really telling the Malay community that DAP and the royalty are conspiring with their anti-Malay and anti-Islam agenda? Is Umno really claiming that Penang is a secular state where Islam is not recognised and that the Malays are second-class citizens and that Selangor is abandoning those “Malay/Muslims” institutions that are there to safeguard the interests of the Malay community, the royal institution being the primary one?

I mean really, just a couple of months ago, Lim Kit Siang, the whipping boy for Umno, got into a heap of trouble for claiming that the “DAP supports Islamisation based on the constitution”. Naturally this did not go down well with many people, including me – “Attempting to claim that DAP supports Islamisation based on the constitution is nonsensical since the Islamists claim the very same in their quest for religious supremacy. The reality is that the constitution, like Islam, is open to interpretation hence any attempt to impose an ideological or religious agenda when framing policy ‘based on the constitution’ is an exercise in sophistry.”

I realise I give DAP a whole lot of grief but what this demonstrates is that if anything, it seems that most times DAP’s raison d'être is proving that it is not anti-Malay and anti-Islam. The problem is that DAP has had to make too many compromises when it comes to egalitarian politics and policies because of this sad reality. This is perhaps the most devastating results of these Umno lies.

Syariah-compliant hospital

You want another example. Remember last year when Deputy Health Minister Dr Hilmi Yahaya got huffy because the Penang state government claimed that it was building the country’s first syariah-compliant hospital. Hilmi had to remind everyone that even the medicine and vaccines used by the ministry were “halal” - "Only the vaccine for rotavirus is non-halal and we did not have that. It is available only at certain private hospitals or clinics. The ministry's pharmacy department has also carried out DNA tests to ensure that the vaccines that we use are free from pork and pig derivatives.” Can anyone really make the claim that DAP is anti-Malay and anti-Islam?

Now, for folks like me (and maybe you too) who do not want religion - any religion - in our public institutions, the case could be made that DAP is pro-Malay and pro-Islam when they should be neutral when it comes to race and religion. This, of course, makes the lies spread by the establishment even weirder.

“Sensitivity” is the terrible burden that non-Malay politicians have to operate with. The same applies to Muslim opposition politicians but the burden is a different kind. Non-Malay politicians in the establishment have to justify, and most often help, disseminate racist and bigoted rhetoric of their dominant partner, all the while claiming that religious and racial equilibrium is paramount to a functional Malaysia.

Opposition non-Malay politicians have to make their case with one hand tied behind their back, because the sensitivity of the majority community is used by the state as a means to control dissent and sanction non-Malay political operatives on trumped-up racial and religious charges. A good example of this is when criticism against public institution becomes attacks against “Malay” institutions.

What are these sensitive issues anyway? When it comes to race and religion it means that whatever Umno deems is sensitive. Non-Malays are not allowed to uses certain words deemed “Islamic”. When it comes to conflict between religious laws and civil ones, even though the constitution is clear on this, religious laws trump civil ones.

Umno information chief Annuar Musa gets to say that he is a “racist” and this is in line with Islamic teaching and gets away with it. He says this while attending a red-shirt shindig that often makes racial and religious attacks against the Chinese community. Correct me if I am wrong, but did any Muslim politician or group make a police report against Annuar for offending the sensitivity of Muslims? Or does Islam really condone "racism"?

He said: “Being racial is endorsed in Islam as long as you are not cruel towards other people. This rally if you say is racist, yes. What are you scared of? Islam has put in place guidelines, what is not allowed is racism that is cruel towards other races.”