R Nadeswaran

All his money had been used to supply and install windows and doors in a downtown building in Melbourne in 2013. Having worked on the development to almost completion, his company, Trubuilt Properties, did not get paid. Neither did his workers and dozens of other contractors. They were left in the lurch and the owners of the building slipped away to Malaysia.

Bond, having to borrow from his parents to send Cooper for the carnival in Darwin, was a bitter man after his whole business collapsed. With other creditors, he went to the Victorian Supreme Court, and sought the appointment of Andrew Yeo, a senior partner in Pitcher Partners, who assigned the case to a bright young man, Odie Henzel. Infuriated at Bond’s treatment, Henzel joined the mission to unearth the secrets of the property – Dudley House, which is now become one of the three buildings in what is now known as the “Mara Scandal.”

Three Malaysians –Azizi Yom Ahmad, Abdul Ghani Yusof and Dennis Teen together with Australians, Peter Mills and Chris Dimitriou, had set up a company – Wanissa Properties – to sell Dudley House to Mara for A$17.8 million but inflate the price to A$22.5 million. Court records show that Henzel discovered an email dated March 2013 in which Mara agreed to buy Dudley House – to be used as a hostel for Malaysian students – and a payment of “AUS$4,785,000 in the form of introduction and consultancy fees” would be wired to a mysterious Singapore shelf company.

Nick McKenzie is an award-winning investigative journalist working for The Age and produces the Four Corners documentary programme for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. He caught the whiff as he had already been working on stories of foreign buyers and “dirty money” being used to push up property prices in the state of Victoria where Melbourne is located. McKenzie started his own investigations only to discover a trail of “dirty dealings” by Malaysian parties.

He roped me in and we worked on the scandal, unearthing a trail of deceit, money laundering and fraud. On June 22 last year, The Age and The Sun broke the story simultaneously. This was followed by raids carried out in both countries but to date, no one has been prosecuted. In April, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) deputy chief commissioner Azam Baki said 24 witnesses had been called up and officers visited seven premises, including a law firm, the offices of both Mara Inc and an appraiser and their associates.

“We need more time to complete this case as it involves another country. We have put in a request for mutual legal assistance with the Australian Attorney-General’s office but have yet to receive any response,” he was quoted as saying.

Scam invoices

While the criminal aspect of the case may have ground to a halt, the case has not ended up in the back burner. In December, Pitcher Partners as liquidators of Trubuilt filed a civil suit against Azizi and Abdul Ghani. (The liquidator had previously sued Teen, a Malaysian with Australian permanent resident status. The case was settled out of court with undisclosed sums being paid. Records show that Teen was engaged by the Azizi and Yusuf to act as their agent.)

They are seeking about A$3 million from the duo for payments due for the renovation work carried out on the building. Yeo alleges that the “two Datos” (as they are referred to in court papers) were involved in the renovation and sale of the property to Thrushcross Land Holdings Limited – a wholly-owned subsidiary of Mara for A$22.5 million. It is learnt that attempts are being made to serve the court papers on Azizi and Abdul Ghani.

The writ filed at the Supreme Court of Victoria in Melbourne further claims that notwithstanding the contract (sale) price, a sum of A$4.7 million was paid out of the proceeds to three Malaysian companies – Leuven Capital Sdn Bhd, Optimus Capital Group of Companies Sdn Bhd and TRR Heritage Sdn Bhd.

These three Malaysian companies, Yeo avers, are directly or indirectly associated with the interests of Yusof and Azizi and the former Mara CEO Ahmad Nazim Abdul Rahman and/or other current or former employees of Mara, Mazrul Haizad Marof and Izaddeen Daud.

It had been previously reported that on Jan 17, 2013, TRR Heritage had billed Wanissa for A$725,000 for “Marketing and Professional Advise (sic)”. Two weeks later, Optimus Capital submitted an invoice for A$675,000 as “advertising and promotion fee” totalling A$675,000. On March 31, 2013, Leuven Capital submitted an invoice for A$2 million for “consultation and advisory fee”. At the end of April, it submitted yet another invoice for “sales commission” for A$1.35 million.

Australian authorities believe the money paid to the three Malaysian identities were on the basis of scam invoices. Their investigations showed that no such fees were payable to Malaysian companies as Wanissa had made a direct sale to Mara Inc. It was a private sale and there were no commissions, promotions and advertising fees to be paid for.

"Our Great Leader"

COMMENT | Amanah communications director Khalid Samad is mistaken. If Dr Mahathir Mohamad returns to the Umno/BN fold for whatever reason after the next general election, it would not be a betrayal to Pakatan Harapan. The only betrayal would be that which Harapan commits to the opposition voting public. However, there would be neither any sting nor moral condemnation to that betrayal because most Harapan supporters welcome the alliance with the former Umno president and prime minister. While I have argued that this is a Hobson’s choice of the opposition’s making, any attempt to minimise such betrayal is unwarranted and honestly self-aggrandising.

Mind you, this is not a jab at Khalid whom I think is an honourable politician - a trait lacking in the current political leadership - but rather a rejoinder that “betrayal” of any kind in the current political climate is meaningless. So what if Bersatu, Mahathir or any other politician betrays Harapan? This is a single-issue election – the wrong issue in my opinion – which means the current Umno grand poohbah is vanquished or he is not. The best-case scenario if the opposition fails in that endeavour is that it retains Selangor and Penang.

While I have no doubt that opposition political strategists are working that angle (retaining Selangor and Penang at all cost), the real issue is whether Mahathir and Bersatu can deliver. If he cannot, and if the opposition loses support from their base, then the real question is, will Harapan cling on to the former prime minister?

But you ask, why are the stakes so low? Well, the stakes are low because even if Najib wins and this kleptocrat prevails, it would not be as if the sky will come tumbling down. We have endured a corrupt kleptocracy for decades and many would argue that we as a people, despite the overt systemic discrimination, have thrived.

I have argued numerous times of the futility of this strategy – “And right here is the problem for the opposition because this is really is what most voters who vote Barisan National think. Through the decades, despite all the corruption scandals, the sustained attacks against independent institutions, the slow process of dismantling our individual rights, Malaysia, in the words of Josh Hong, ‘for all its flaws, Malaysia remains a prosperous, relatively efficient and economically vibrant country.’”

Besides, the history of Harapan is littered with betrayals that most opposition supporters have accepted. Harapan has always managed to find allies – maybe except PSM – that they managed to do business with, who eventually betrayed the opposition alliance. I would argue that the opposition is extremely comfortable with betrayals. How many political operatives, political entities and the rest of the flotsam and jetsam of establishment politics have betrayed the opposition? Honestly, I have lost count.

And let us be honest. The opposition was not fooled because they were naive. The reality is that the opposition has never met a political outfit or personality that was anti-Najib that they did not have use for, until ultimately, they were betrayed because they were outplayed.

No cohesive platform

I am not making the argument that disparate interests should not attempt to come together but rather, the opposition has never really made an attempt to work together in an honest way. There was never any attempt to form a cohesive ideology or a platform that honestly addressed the agendas that opposing interests brought to the table. There were always these piecemeal efforts to bury the political and/or ideological differences and shoe horn everything into the “save Malaysia” narrative.

Moreover, many opposition supporters were comfortable with this. I would argue that these “betrayal” narratives sustained the opposition when things fell apart because of their own ineptness. “We were betrayed” when it should be “we should never have been in this position in the first place”. Meanwhile, the Umno regime has its own cries of betrayal. The urban demographic has betrayed them. Former members have betrayed them. With Umno, it goes further. Betrayals are not just against the political party. Betrayals are against race and religion. This is why I suppose Bersatu is attempting the same strategy.

I mean take a look at what Bersatu Youth chief Syed Saddiq Abdul Rahman says while describing the current Umno grand poohbah as the “Malay race's number one enemy” - “Pawning the interests of the Malays by giving mega contracts to communist China while we have to shoulder the debts amounting to billions of ringgit.”

I made my stand on this issue of the PRC deals clear here – that pro-opposition rhetoric consists of furthering the narrative that China is taking advantage of the natives and the country is being sold piece by piece to a foreign power to settle Najib's debts. While my disdain for Najib administration is well-documented (by me, mostly), making the argument that these China deals have no credibility merely because they come from the Najib regime is disingenuous.”

So, sit back and enjoy the show. Nobody is going to betray the opposition because nobody was loyal to the opposition in the first place. PAS will eventually engage in three-concerned fights with its former allies because they have a new sugar daddy. I am sure there will be defections on both sides in the upcoming general elections.

Betrayals will be rife and teeth gnashed, but ultimately the losers will not be the urban demographic but the “lower classes” that many politicians and analysts are banking on to save the opposition.

Hindraf

COMMENT | Former prime minister and de facto opposition leader Dr Mahathir Mohamad is right when he said that Indian representation in Pakatan Harapan is inadequate. He is also correct when he claimed in the nomenclature of that specific class (read this as the hypocritical ruling elite class (establishment and opposition), that Hindraf in its various incarnations represents the marginalised Indian communities rather than the urban professional opposition-leaning class of the Indian Malaysian polity.

As for Umno vice-president Hishammuddin Hussein’s contention that Mahathir’s alleged unilateral decision to meet Persatuan Hindraf Malaysia (PHM) chief P Waythamoorthy as indicative of the lack of “team spirit” within Harapan, I would like to remind the minister that pacts amongst kleptocrats and their enablers does not qualify as “team spirit”.

Meanwhile, MIC Youth chief R Sivarraajh is in dreamland if he thinks that the Indian community has lost faith in Hindraf. The marginalised Indian community has lost faith in politics, period, and there is an overt distrust of the thuggish behaviour of the MIC, and more importantly the establishment, when it comes to religious matters that concern the Indian community. Waythamoorthy openly challenging Zakir Naik plays better with them than a minister who makes excuses as to the delay of a bill which corrects unilateral conversion. Chew on that for a minute.

It is great to see that DAP would keep an open mind on this matter, because really, when you are collaborating with a right-wing “Malay only” political party, what are you going to say about Hindraf or any politician who “champions” Indian rights? That we are not a race-based coalition? Seriously, get over yourselves.

However, Harapan should also collaborate with P Uthayakumar. Hindraf partisans should not take this to mean that I favour one brother over the other, but rather, that both working with the opposition should be able to galvanise the Indian community, which is apparently needed to “save Malaysia”.
In fact, Harapan should give Uthayakumar a place at the Harapan table by allocating a seat for him in whatever constituency they think he will be most effective. If anyone is a credible candidate for galvanising marginalised communities, it is P Uthayakumar.

Not only has he on-the-ground knowledge of working class issues, he has spoken truth to power to the Umno establishment and the opposition. He has been jailed by the regime and instead of being chastised, he has taken up prison reform as a means to combat social injustice.

You can read my most recent interviews with him here about his incarceration and his efforts in prison reform – “As it stands, I see a lack of political will because the Indian poor draw no or very little political mileage in Malaysia. If we are serious about bringing down the crime rate, then we must discard the race, colour, creed and religious considerations.”

On a collision course

Uthayakumar’s politics have always been confrontational but not in the mainstream sense, which is blame everything on Umno. He mixes politically incorrect rhetoric with deeper societal truths that have never gone done well with mainstream political activists and politicians drunk on the Bangsa Malaysia kool aid.

In a series of interviews after I was declared Hindraf’s public enemy number one, which you can read here, it was apparent that Uthayakumar was on a collision course with not only the Umno regime but also with the then Pakatan Rakyat.

“The Hindraf struggle is about permanent and wholesome solutions from Umno and Pakatan state governments as granted to the bi-racial 1Malaysian Malay and Chinese communities and not the temporary piecemeal solutions for the Indian poor like dishing out hampers, rice bags, ang pows, mock cheques and other handouts.

“Hindraf supports regime change and wishes Pakatan all the best, but it does not want the federal government to be replaced by an Umno clone. Nevertheless, on a people-to-people basis, the Indians have no or very little problems with the Malay or Chinese communities at the ground level.” Talking to Uthayakumar these days, his views may have been tempered but he still has a deep level of cynicism towards the political elites of this country. No doubt this new alliance with former Umno powerbrokers may not sit well with him, which is why Harapan should consider having someone like him, who has no trouble speaking to power if only to establish a rapport with communities outside the oppositional mainstream.

Mind you, this article was not written on the request of Uthayakumar. I have no idea if he would be interested in collaborating with Harapan or even if he is interested in getting back into politics. Here is a man who because of his “race” has felt what most other oppositional politicians who have fared similarly with the Umno have not.

That is by virtue of his marginalisation – granted, his polemics did not help – was maliciously treated by the state as a criminal instead of a political prisoner. This, of course, was a mistake since for someone like Uthayakumar it merely meant that he focused on a cause that most people had no interest in – prison reform.

What have we seen in the past few weeks? We have seen the sordid state of our prison system. We have seen how the system inflicts abuse, disregard rights, in many cases actually sanction the murder of prisoners by action or negligence.

These are problems which have an overt effect on society and while there are many committed activists who seek solutions to these problems, having Uthayakumar as a spokesperson for this issue and his history with advocating for the marginalised of the Indian community would be something more than mere tokenism for Harapan.

I have no idea if anyone from Harapan has reached out to Uthayakumar or if he is even interested in this possible gig, but I do think that this is a good opportunity for Harapan to attract votes from the marginalised community by having Waythamoorthy and Uthayakumar on board the Harapan Express. Lastly, I would like to thank Centre for Policy Initiatives director Lim Teck Ghee for this article and contextualising how and why Uthayakumar would be an asset to Harapan.

COMMENT | We do not normally see pieces like Fa Abdul’s piece ‘And the award for best actor goes to…’ on Malaysiakini very often. This is to say that the “serious stuff” that Fa Abdul wrote is ignored for pieces that highlight the corruption scandals in this country and not the underlying moral and intellectual bankruptcy of the opposition.

Mahathir supported the genocide in East Timor

COMMENT | Would it surprise anyone that when the dust of this recent scuffle at the Nothing to Hide 2.0 forum settles, the perpetrators – always young Malay youths – would be portrayed as the aggrieved party, much like the thieves of the Low Yat fiasco? Umno has always been protective of its voting base with Malay oppositional voices harassed and intimidated when it comes to courting this specific demographic.

While I have been skeptical of the efficacy of this particular tactic of the opposition when it comes to using the 1MDB issue as a vote getter, the response from the regime and the attempts to derail any form of dialogue points to how much this regime fears the architect of modern Malaysia – Dr Mahathir Mohamad -and his designs on the throne of Putrajaya.

While the current Umno grand poohbah holds solidarity prayers with Muslims begging God for peace and stability, the Najib refuseniks busy themselves with the task of destabilising Umno hegemony. There is no point talking about a Malaysian tsunami because the violence in this event, the harassment that Malay oppositional figures face, the use of the state apparatus to investigate Najib refuseniks’ sympathisers points to the reality that the next general elections will be the ultimate Malay scuffle.

While some would argue that the questions asked by these so-called provocateurs were meant to derail the forum, the reality is that those questions form the basis of right-wing Malay politics and are the means to which Umno has maintained hegemony.

Those question about the Memali incident, Bersatu’s simpatico with the DAP and the supposed sins of jailed political prisoner Anwar Ibrahim – rights, race and religion – were meant to demonstrate that the former Umno prime minister had abandoned the Malay community and conspires with the ‘Chinese DAP’ to supplant the rightful place of Malays and Islam in this country.

So, while urban opposition propaganda promulgates the narrative that we are all in this together, the reality is that this “scuffle” between the Malays in the existential threat facing Umno today. This fight will eventually determine not who controls the destiny of the Malay polity – mainstream Malay politics is based on “ketuanism” – but rather who controls the gravy train. Nothing will come of any investigation into this matter as nothing has ever come of any investigation where the Umno ‘titushkas’ have used political violence to disrupt the numerous oppositional and other activists’ forums meant to highlight or discuss the malfeasances of the state.

Ironically, a friend of mine from PAS told me just recently that he remembers the time when the Umno ‘titushkas’ disrupted ceramahs and various other political gatherings to demonstrate that the opposition could not maintain stability in their own house, then how could they with the country. In case anyone assumes that it is prejudicial to jump to conclusion as to Umno’s role and my description of the Umno provocateurs, read the comments of Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi with regards to the intersection between organised thuggery and Umno – “He said, ‘The 6,171 Malays, they are not real thugs (samseng), they were Pekida members and were part of the Tiga Line group, Gang 30, Gang 7 - these are festivities (kenduri-kendara) gangsters." Furthermore, he added, ‘I tell our Tiga Line friends, do what should be done.’”

And what exactly should these groups be doing? I would argue that if three years ago you made the claim that Tiga Line was disrupting Bersih activities, you would get Umno members saying that these thugs are only doing what needs to be done.”

Instilling fear

In other words, it should surprise no one that what needed to be done was to disrupt Nothing to Hide 2.0 to instil a sense of fear in any Malay participant that there would be violence in Bersatu’s political gathering. This is why the state security apparatus is shifting the blame to the organisers of the forum instead of the disruptors of the event.

Always keep in mind Umno veteran Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah’s rejoinder – “(Bagaimanapun) jangan memandang rendah kepada kerajaan kerana mereka ada kuasa, ada televisyen, radio, duit dan media. Mereka juga ada alat-alat risikan dan sebagainya. Media dia lebih tahu pada kita. Dia tahu kita belum tahu lagi. Sama ada dengan kekuasaan itu, parti yang berkuasa akan kalah saya tidak tahu.”

What makes this a little more dangerous is the fact that Umno is not only turning on the Malay community, it is also turning on its own. It should surprise nobody that the former prime minister has many sympathisers within Umno who do not make up the elite of Umno but who are the “ordinary people” of the party and the beneficiaries of his patronage of his long Umno watch.

These true believers are pining for the days where the corruption was managed and Umno kept the Islamists – PAS – at bay while the Islamists within worked their dark sorcery on the Malay community. These are the sleepers that the current Umno elite fear. What damage have they done in terms of leaks (propaganda) or could they do during the election (sabotage)?

One of the complaints I get from Malay opposition operatives is that I always seem to highlight the political violence against non-Malay oppositional parties and personalities and imply – I disagree with this description – that Malays have an easy ride when it comes to spreading their message to the Malay demographic.

Malay academics and social activists always remind me that when it comes to violence carried out by the state, the Malay demographic feels the boot the most. However, what should be of concern is that this time because of the political actors involved, the level of support of the Najib refuseniks and the hidden hands of the Malay oppositional political elite, the violence could escalate.

It would be easy to dismiss Nothing to Hide 2.0 violence as just another episode where the state disrupts a gathering – or as some have argued, a black bag operation from the master manipulator – because this is, in reality, the shape of things to come.

When you have a sitting prime minister who refuses to acknowledge if he would abide by the results of the democratic process, when there are laws in place which override the traditional mechanism for declaring emergency and a security apparatus which is not independent (and has more or less made such a claim), what you have is a Molotov cocktail of racial and religious disorder.

Secretary-General Takiyuddin Hassan who uttered horse manure

COMMENT | PAS secretary-general Takiyuddin Hassan uttered the most odious defence of his religion here in Malaysia when he claimed “for the last 10 to 20 years, the 'muallaf' (Muslim converts) also suffered. It is the same thing" (as M Indira Gandhi). Really? Of course, he does not explain how their suffering is the same.

Let us take these examples, which are demonstrative of the worst excesses of the state and the state-sanctioned religion which has caused distress in countless non-Muslim lives.

Have Muslim converts had their children unilaterally converted to a religion which the child cannot renounce when he or she comes of age? Has the Muslim convert been denied justice in the civil courts? Has the Muslim convert had their child kidnapped and then had the state claim that they would not interfere because the ruling of the civil court conflicted with the syariah court?

Has the Muslim convert watched in horrified anger and grief over the years as the child is indoctrinated to a state religion which the child could never leave and if the child attempted to do so would be sent to a rehabilitation camp where more alleged abuse awaits the now adult child? This is how S Deepa suffered, and also M Indira Gandhi. Has a Muslim convert ever suffered the same way? Let us unpack the statements made by Takiyuddin a little bit more. He said, "The amendment appears as if the Muslim convert will be forced to settle his marriage dissolution in the civil courts. It's a contradiction (with syariah jurisdiction).”

What does this really mean? The civil courts ostensibly apply to all Malaysians equally. This idea of conflict with the syariah courts is merely code for the reality that the syariah courts favour the Muslim. So, it is not justice that the Muslim is seeking but preferential treatment conferred by religion.

When in the S Deepa case, her allegedly criminal husband says that he embraced Islam so he could get special privileges, what this says is that he believed that he would get special treatment because he was a Muslim. This is exactly the underlying theme of the PAS secretary-general's objection to the proposed amendments.

What is sickening about Takiyuddin’s comment is that it implies that Muslims and non-Muslims are operating on a level-playing field. That if there were injustices, then the Muslim and the non-Muslim suffers the same. This is clearly not the case.

Indira Gandhi’s child, as was S Deepa’s, was unilaterally converted, now their grief is hijacked by this Islamic party, the Umno state and by Muslims who support this weltanschauung. These Islamists do this as a means of dismissing the grief, loss, and powerlessness of these two women to camouflage the injustice of how their religion, their “ketuanan” and their hegemony is inflicted upon Malaysians who are not Muslims.

Islam trumps secular laws

There are two important points I have made over the course of writing about the state-sanctioned ‘crime’ of unilateral conversion. These two points are the real issues. All the rest is just a diversion to hide the fact that the superiority of Islam trumps secular laws and that non-Muslims would always be at the mercy of an oppressive system that does not care about their rights which we are constantly reminded are enshrined in our constitution.

1. “What unilateral conversion does, and we should be clear that this involves Islam as the Islamic (sic) minister is wont to remind everyone, is rob the child of the right of his or her religious freedom. This has far-reaching consequences in Malaysia because race and religion have legal obligations along with the so-called special privileges that place a Muslim in the harsh glare of federal and state Islamic authorities.

2. “If an adult wishes to place himself or herself under such obligations, then it is their right to do so, but a parent unilaterally deciding to convert a child without the consent of their partner is not only morally reprehensible but should also come with legal consequences, preferably jail time with a couple of strokes of the rotan.”

So you see, the problem is really not unilateral conversion. If a parent, for whatever reason, chooses to convert the child to a specific religion, the remedy is that when the child becomes an adult, he or she is free to leave the religion that was imposed upon him or her. The problem here in Malaysia is that Muslims – even though they were unilaterally converted – cannot leave Islam.

This means that they remain Muslims with all the obligations that come with professing the faith here in Malaysia. Let me remind everyone that if the executive wanted to change the laws, it could do it easily. In fact, when it involves elections, especially where non-Muslims play an important role, the executive has stepped in and personally interfered in the administration of justice in this country. The Rooney Rebbit case is a prime example.

The words of Sabah Council of Churches president Reverend Jerry Dusing states the case plainly – “This turn of events clearly project two things - firstly, the NRD (National Registration Department) which is an administrative arm of the federal government has no regard and respect for our religious freedom guaranteed under the federal constitution and the Malaysia Agreement 1963. Secondly, that our exercise of religious freedom is subject to political interference.”

Therefore, when the government claims that it needs a two-thirds majority to remedy this issue, this is total horse manure. It is a big lie that these so-called defenders of race and religion propagate to deceive non-Muslims into voting for a corrupt regime which would impose their religion on the non-Muslim demographic and then claim that they are suffering as those (non-Muslims) who feel the boot of the state on their necks.

To answer DAP parliamentarian M Kula Segaran’s question, these extremists do not care if Tevi Darsiny is a Muslim or a Hindu. All they care about is in the eyes of the law, she is a Muslim. Her children will be Muslim. This is religious kidnapping. This is the ongoing agenda of cultural hegemony. This is a crime, and there is nothing you can do about it.

COMMENT | So Mahadi Awang, a representative from the Yayasan Dakwah Islamiah Malaysia (Yadim), claimed that “Muslims who turn atheists only do so because they wish to break away from the chains of the Islamic way of life in order to experience pleasure”, which seems a rather dubious assertion.

Of course, if you are a rich Muslim, then you are exempt from the overt policing that your average Muslim is subjected to. Hence the more logical explanation as to why some Muslims become atheist – let’s dispense with the deeper intellectual motives for a moment – is not because they want to experience pleasure – they do that already – but because they do not want their pleasure policed by the state. Of course, in Malaysia they have to be quiet about it but sometimes affirming your non-belief with simpatico people provides clarity that all the religious indoctrination that they have received since birth has not.

I really do not blame the Umno state for coming down hard on Muslim atheists. Since the constitution defines who a “Malay” is and Islam is the most important part of that definition, what happens when a Malay chooses to shed his or her faith? Does he or she cease being “Malay”? If someone is not a “Malay” anymore, what happens to the special privileges?

Since there are Christian and other “bumiputeras”, the argument can be made that an atheist Malay is still technically a bumiputera unless of course there is legislation in Malaysia which sanctions a lack of belief in God. But wait, the first principle in the Rukunegara is “Belief in God”, which is annoying to many atheists but more importantly, it means that a Muslim atheist is in a religious quagmire that he or she may never break free from.

I mean no oppositional political party is going to defend an atheist Muslim’s non-belief. So-called “secular” parties fund Islamic religious institutions, champion the rights of non-Muslims faiths and champion the rights of religious freedoms offering a mixed bag of secular principles that more often than not does more damage to secular principles than inaction itself. This is why Islamic extremism is on the rise. Of course, if folks got their noses out – just for a minute – of the 1MDB cesspool, they would realise that the opposition mired in religious politics is part of the problem.

Read what Yenny Wahid, daughter of the late Indonesian President Abdurrahman Wahid, said - “We're not just coming up with a counter narrative, we are coming up with a counter identity, and that's what AI (Archipelago Islam) is all about. We believe we're good Muslims but to be a good Muslim, we don't have to accept the recipes that are handed out by some radicals from the Middle East."

What are the Muslim counter identities here? The Muslim as feminist? The Muslim as liberal? The Muslim who does not believe? The gay Muslim? The secular Muslim? The non-observant Muslim? All these counter identities the state wishes to expunge and the opposition has no interests in nurturing for obvious political reasons.

A lack of understanding?

Seriously, the atheist plague? How I wish there was really an atheist plague. If there was an atheist plague in this country, then Umno, PAS and Bersatu would be cast aside as would every politician who bleats about how god put him or her on his or her political path. The religious card would be totally ineffective in the national discourse and money wasted on religious initiatives would be channelled elsewhere.

However, let us not kid ourselves. Corruption would still exist but at least we would not have to put up with the hypocritical religious rantings of the state or politicians – whatever the religion – asking us to look to god to solve our problems or hide our problems.

I mean, we do not have any gay pride parades here so what are these so-called atheists going to do? March on the streets and hope the god they do not believe in will save them from the chemically-laced water cannons of the state? Demand that their special privileges be stripped from them because they are not “Malays” anymore, or worse still, feel entitled to their special privileges even though they are not Muslims anymore? Carry around posters claiming that they are ex-Muslims and they are here to stay?

Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Shahidan Kassim says that Muslims who become atheist do so from a lack of understanding of Islam. This is the excuse given to any Muslim who does not subscribe to the state-sponsored religion.

Muslims who want to reform the religion do so from a lack of understanding of the religion. Muslim women who demand equal rights do so from a lack of understanding of the religion. Gay Muslims who want to be accepted – one wonders why – do so from a lack of understanding of the religion. Liberal Muslims do not understand the religion. Non-Muslims who speak up for their fellow citizens do not understand the religion.

Maybe if so many people do not understand your religion, the problem is with the religion and not with the people attempting to leave or reform it. Furthermore, this obsession of the state in their belief they can “fix” Muslims who stray from the state-endorsed path is the apogee of ignorance that some Muslims take pride in.

Apparently, the state can “fix” gay Muslims. They can “fix” liberal Muslims. They can “fix” feminist Muslims. They can “fix” atheist Muslims. The only things they cannot seem to “fix” are Muslims who are engaged in nationwide and worldwide financial corruption scandals.

As Sam Harris, author of ‘Islam and the Future of Tolerance: A Dialogue’, opens this piece, he should end it – “The great liberal betrayal of this generation is that in the name of liberalism, communal rights have been prioritised over individual autonomy within minority groups. And minorities within minorities really do suffer because of this betrayal.

We know from the National Civics Bureau (Biro Tatanegara, BTN) courses that Umno’s principles are an unholy brew of racial supremacy, religious bigotry and corporatism that was endorsed by a compliant Malaysian polity, resulting in a cascade of religious and racial issues that compromised every facet of government. With the ouster of the charismatic, jailed political prisoner – Anwar Ibrahim – from the Umno fold, the contemporary Umno narrative is one of loss of power and influence by attrition.polity, resulting in a cascade of religious and racial issues that compromised every facet of government. With the ouster of the charismatic, jailed political prisoner – Anwar Ibrahim – from the Umno fold, the contemporary Umno narrative is one of loss of power and influence by attrition.

The Malay vote is the most important vote to Umno. I wrote about how the dialectic in the Malay community is a threat to Umno hegemony, which is the real reason behind the racial and religious sabre-rattling. This is the existential threat Umno is facing – “what would happen if a majority of Muslims in this country decide that they have had enough with state religious authorities intruding into their lives?

They have had enough with money going into religious organisations while essential services that benefit their community are underfunded and mired in bureaucratic corruption. What would happen if they grew tired of the hypocrisy of the state where Muslim elites were immune from the harsh glare of Islam but the rest of the polity was not?”

While the non-Malay component parties of Barisan National scramble to discover their relevance in a post-Pakatan era, the reality is that their days of being handmaidens to Umno warlords are over. Most non-Malay opposition supporters have realised that it is better to have no representation in an Umno Parliament than the compliant non-Malay representation that the traditional mainstream component parties represent.

Just a couple of articles ago, I asked what can the MCA do for Umno – “the answer to that is MCA obviously cannot do anything much for the ruling BN coalition anymore. How do you remain relevant when you have lost your voting base? Umno does not need MCA to win elections. The dodgy meme that the current Umno prime minister is a “minority” prime minister is as fallacious as the so-called 'Chinese tsunami'.”

The split in the Malay polity

The Chinese community has borne the brunt of the dark art form of the propaganda warlocks of Putrajaya, but what has really rattled the Umno hegemon is the split in the Malay polity. While their former master strategist – Dr Mahathir Mohamad – has thrown in with the opposition, the only viable Malay/Muslim political party left is PAS. And those folks are really kooky.

When you have Umno members, ministers and the prime minister claiming that the Chinese would usurp the power of the “Malays” if the opposition ever came to power, this is the very definition of racism. When you claim that “Islam” is under siege by make-believe non-Islamic bogeyman, this is the definition of religious bigotry.

Because the Registrar of Society (ROS) is playing coy with the DAP by not officially asking them to hold re-elections and there is an established chain of events that point to a conspiracy between the executive and a public institution, the only conclusion any rational person can make is that Umno and ROS are acting mala fide against the DAP.

When you consider the racist rhetoric coming out of Umno power brokers, government ministers and government institutions, the religious bigotry from the same, Umno should just drop this charade of democracy and ban all non-Malay/Muslim political parties. This way, the Malay community, or least that section of the Umno voting base, will not have to be encumbered by the existential threat the non-Malays supposedly pose to their “bangsa” and “agama”.

If banning the DAP is not enough, they could also partially ban PKR, since it has non-Malay members and this could possibly pose a threat to Umno/Malay hegemony. However, even if you ban non-Malay/Muslim political parties, the problem persists in that the non- Malay polity will still vote.
If non-Malays vote, what is stopping non-Malays from voting for opposition candidates who do not support the policies of Umno? If the Malay vote is split, then non-Malays, especially in the urban areas, may cast their vote for independent non-Malay candidates. So, perhaps the answer is banning all non-Malay/Muslim candidates.

But – and this is an important “but” – non-Malays who do not have a choice of non-Malay candidates may vote for Malay candidates who do not support the polices of the ruling hegemon. These Malay politicians may become proxies to non-Malay interest and in this way, subvert the policies of “bangsa” and “agama”.

This would also mean that the utilitarian value of the non-Malay component parties would be non-existent. If it is true that non-Malays would rather have no representation than representation of BN component parties, then the fig leaf of inclusion could be discarded. There would be no need to govern by consensus. Instead, Umno could rule by fiat.

This would mean that, in order for Umno to safeguard the “Malays” and “Islam”, the only candidates that should stand for elections are those Malay candidates who support the policies of Umno as they relate to “bangsa” and “agama”. But how does a political hegemon ensure that people vote in the “correct” way?

More importantly, how does the hegemon ensure that the “correct” candidates stand for elections?
So, what Umno really needs are only Malay candidates who support its policies and a voting public that would vote the correct way. There are only two options, as I see it.

1) Umno could give the illusion of choice and have various Malay political parties that are, in reality, just another head of Umno like the mythical hydra; or

2) Just cancel democracy and have members of Umno vote in their candidate.

Of course, by this time there would be no need for the non-Malay vote and by this, I mean that non-Malays would not have the vote.

COMMENT | When Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi says that the amended enactment allowing for (amongst other things) public whipping in Kelantan only affects Muslims, it is yet again another falsehood told by the state to non-Muslims in this country.

There is empirical evidence - something I know that some Muslims frown upon - which collaborates the fact that anything concerning Islam in this country affects every single citizen in this country. Furthermore, there is ample evidence that the minions of Umno are exempt from the harsh glare of Islamic laws which is not the reality for every other Muslim in this country.

While corruption scandals will never be investigated and wrongdoers subjected to public canings, there will be hundreds of Muslims who will be subjected to such public humiliations for “crimes” that ultimately do not affect the country as the crimes committed by the political elites and rich Muslim cabals.

When it comes to justice and fairness, remember what PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang said about the prime minister despite the mountain of evidence of moral and criminal wrongdoing surrounding the 1MDB fiasco - “As reported in the press, Hadi has no problem saying that Najib is only human  and not a saint, and humans make mistakes, but the act of attacking and bombarding the prime minister with unfounded allegations is uncalled for.”

“In other words, Hadi condemns the so-called ‘unfounded allegations’ and dismisses the alleged corruption scandals against the current Umno prime minister as the regular failings of human being. Is this what his syariah system would look like?”

So, when the Kelantan state government warns non-Muslim political parties not to meddle in the affairs of Islam, I say to the Kelantan state government - when Islam does not intrude into the lives of non-Muslims is the day I, as a non-Muslim, will stop commenting on Islam in this country. Do I need to remind anyone that the rhetoric coming out of many Islamists in this country that our rights as non-Muslims should be curtailed?

I think I will. Remember when Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Jamil Khir Baharom wanted Umno to crack down on religious pluralism because “there were numerous organised efforts being carried out to challenge the freedom allowed in Islam”?

Here was my response to that horse manure - “What exactly does ‘freedom allowed in Islam’ mean? My own thinking is that the way Islam is defined by the Umno state, ‘freedom’ means freedom to curtail the rights enshrined in our constitution. Freedom means the freedom to not enforce secular laws when it comes to conflict with Islamic laws. Freedom means the freedom to impose religious edicts on non-Muslims because the religious sensitivities of Muslims are paramount. Freedom means the freedom to restrict laws that make it easier for the citizenry of this country to express their opinions and dissent in a very public manner.”

A prime example of how Islamic imperatives affect non-Muslims is unilateral conversions. Furthermore, this phenomenon and the state’s reluctance to settle this issue once and for all, and the various Islamic hate peddlers from within and outside the Umno state who hamper any form of secular reform to this issue, points to the siege that non-Muslims are under from the Islamists in this country.

As I detailed in another piece - “Islamists like Hadi and the numerous other peddlers of hate like to remind us that their laws do not affect non-Muslim communities. We are told that we are bullying the Muslim community by arguing for rights applicable to all. We are warned that our secular trespass into their religious domain would lead to violence. Unilateral conversion is the corrosive truth that it is the Islamists who would invade our sacred domain of family in the name of their religion.”

It’s not about whipping

What would happen if a state decides to carry enact secular enactments which as defined by the constitution but runs afoul of Islamists who see it as an “an attack” on Islam? You better believe that the Umno federal government would step in and the Islam would be used as a rallying cry against those Malaysian citizens who believe in the supremacy of the constitution and that all Malaysians regardless of ethnicity or religion deserve the rights enshrined in the Malaysian constitution and common basic standards of treatment.

I guess because we have Muslim opposition candidates who bend over backwards when it comes to anything Islamic in this country, someone like Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Azalina Othman Said can make the claim that state’s right is immune from federal scrutiny. If the day comes when an opposition-controlled state decides to rethink the way how Islam is practised in the state, would someone like Azalina be so gung ho on state’s rights?

Let me be very clear. This is not an issue about canning. Singapore carries out whippings - I personally believe that corporal punishment like canning should only be carried out in the armed services - and most people do not seem to have a problem with that, which I find strange. Malaysia too has whippings as a form of punishment for several offences. So, this is not an “Islamic” issue when it comes to this form of punishment.

While you could make the argument that the offences in Islam sanctioned by whipping are different from those under secular law, it should not make any difference for anybody against whipping as a barbaric form of state sanction.

No, this is about how Islam as practised in this country and most Islamic states attempts to normalise brutality in the guise of religious piety, circumvent secular law as a sign of superiority and humiliate Muslims by subjecting them to public ridicule as a means to ensure compliance.

We have all seen those videos online of public whippings and beheadings that happen in Muslim countries. Some Muslims take great pride in those acts of barbarity. Some Muslims I have talked to - not necessarily politicians - approve of how Islam is promulgated in this country and are supportive of those they claim to know what is best for Islam and Muslims in this country.

Can anyone tell me the difference between an Islamic State video of public canings and beheadings and the videos of public canings and beheadings that goes on in Saudi Arabia for instance? Could anyone tell the difference between public caning that would happen in Kelantan and those depicted in IS propaganda videos?

COMMENT | Former MIC chief S Samy Vellu admitted in a Malaysiakini interview that the MIC really did not have a voice in the Mahathir regime. And it may very well be that the current Umno potentate has done more for “Tamil education” in this country than the former Umno prime minster with “Indian heritage”, but the real question will always be, has all this money helped the “Indian” community in this country?

That is a question that only the Indian community can answer. However with regard to the general race discourse, as I outlined in the last piece about the "Indian" problem and the rabbit hole of Malaysian politics - “Because politics in Malaysia is race-based and the alternative media (especially the English media) is defined by the crudest partisan expectations, issues like tokenism, appropriation and crypto-racism, are subsumed beneath a steady diet of Umno transgression and socio-political red herrings” - this idea that there is a difference in the discourse concerning race in the mainstream and alternative media is complete bull manure.

While MIC chief Dr S Subramaniam may be right about what the current Umno poohbah has done for his collection plate, he forgets that Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak has also done far more for the Indian Muslim community than the former prime minister with Indian heritage when he accepted Kimma - The Malaysian Indian Muslim Congress - as associate members of Umno.

Like all good Indian Muslims and their relationship with their Malay Muslim brethren, the parameters of the union were well-defined. According to the grand Umno poohbah - “But they (Kimma) cannot be involved in Umno’s internal matters” - and since Umno internal matters bypass cabinet decisions (which has been proven time and again), I suppose Indian Muslims, when they are not running Umno in a de facto manner - which is the main gripe of Malay nationalist types and especially against former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad - they have to be content to be observers (at least publicly) like the MIC.

Anyone who is interested in what people think of the Indian community should lurk on social media forums and alternative news sites’ comments sections. As one Chinese academic and proponent of Chinese-language education said to me, he has not seen such overt racism and this coming from someone who has dealt with the Umno regime for years. If the race discourse in this country is dominated by the Malay/Chinese dialectic, it is because the opposition has not moved it from this safe zone. I mean does anyone really care how the Indian community votes?

What is the latest statistics on the “Indian” demographic? Does the fact there are so many stateless Indians skewers the official statistics? And does the fact that there are so many “Indian” foreigners who have been given citizenship but who because of their religion become something else, skewers the statistics?

Some people do not even self-identify as “Indian”, preferring instead to highlight whatever sub-group they come from, making cultural and economic variations to differentiate themselves from the disenfranchised Indian community who make up the bulk of the criminal underclass in this country and are the object of derision of a particular type of opposition voters.

Value of Indian vote

Forget about dodgy official statistics for a moment and consider the value of a Malay vote - because of gerrymandering, it is greater than that of a Chinese vote. What do you think the value of an Indian vote is? At this stage because of the idiotic way in which how the “Malay” race is defined in this country and because of the phenomenon of constitutionally-created Malays, I would argue that the Indian vote is near meaningless.

If the Indian vote is meaningless, this would mean that the MIC is meaningless. If the MIC is meaningless, this would mean that whatever issues the Indian community faces are meaningless from a political capital standpoint. Before anyone says there are only “Malaysian” issues, I think you should take a good hard look around at the comments of your fellow partisans, the narratives of the state, the policies of both Umno and the opposition, and see how hypocritical, duplicitous and malicious such rejoinders are.

MIC political operatives tell me, like their opposition counterparts, Indian politicians have to rely on Malay and Chinese votes to get elected. While MIC candidates have some leeway (meaningless as it were) when it comes to pushing Indian issues, opposition Indian politicians have a harder time justifying “racial” issues in the Bangsa Malaysia milieu.

So, someone like Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (Bersatu) president Muhyiddin Yassin can go on about a Malay tsunami, and the DAP and MCA can bicker on about who better represents the Chinese community but whenever the Indian issue comes into play - and truth be told this is mainly an opposition tactic - everyone suddenly becomes race-blind.

One political analyst recently got into a discussion with me about voting across racial lines. He took exception with a quote of mine that he disagreed with, because according to him, the opposition has an ideological stance which is completely different from the ruling Umno hegemon. I reproduce the specific quote below:

“In addition, this idea that voting across racial lines as some sort of evidence of burgeoning multiracial solidarity is complete bunkum. The real test is when people vote across ethnic and religious lines in support of ideologies that run counter to the interests of their communities and by this, I mean egalitarian ideas that run afoul of constitutional sacred cows and social and religious dogma.”

My argument has always been that there is really very little difference between the opposition and the Umno establishment when it comes to the racial politics in this country. Just a couple of months ago, I made this point again - “Part of the reason for this kind of thinking is that the opposition has never really addressed the systemic dysfunctionality that plagues the country. There has never really been a serious dialectic within the opposition on the issues of race, religion and institutional integrity.

The 1MDB issue has been the centrepiece of the fight against Umno but as anyone on the ground will tell you, this has not gained any traction with the demographic that the opposition needs most.” What this latest MIC fiasco demonstrates is not that the MIC is irrelevant or that this is merely just another opportunity for partisans to pour scorn on the MIC and Umno. The real issue here is that the MIC is the first political party to fold in the racial card game of Malaysians politics.

COMMENT | So now we have proof that Umno members “cover” for their president. We have proof that the corruption of Umno presidents are covered up by Umno members. We have proof that Umno members will overlook any kind of malfeasances to keep their leader in power. We have this proof because, Umno vice-president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, who is now acting deputy president of the party, admitted as much when he told former prime minister and de facto opposition leader Dr Mahathir Mohamad (aka Our Great Leader) to shut up or recite Quranic verses to Allah, whichever comes more easily.

This is what Zahid said: “He unveils the flaws of the present leaders, don’t forget we also used to cover his flaws. Don’t let it be our turn to show his shame and ‘scabs’. There is so much that we can reveal.”

Let us unpack this statement. We can discern three important facts from it.

1) Zahid does not dispute that the current Umno leader and Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak has “flaws” and in this case, the only flaws that the current de facto opposition leader Mahathir is unveiling are the numerous corruption scandals that are plaguing this regime. You would note that the Umno acting deputy president is not disputing those flaws, indeed he acknowledges them as human “weakness” that every Umno politician (leader) has.

2) He acknowledges that Umno members “cover” the flaws of their leaders. So, as an Umno member, he is admitting that over the years Umno has engaged in acts to cover the possibly criminal or unconstitutional acts of their leaders to safeguard the position of Umno and the position of the president of Umno and the office of prime minster of this country.

COMMENT | Remember a couple of years ago when the Malaysian Islamic Development Department (Jakim) issued its new guidelines proclaiming comedy shows should not lead to “excessive” laughter.

Muslim Malaysian, Nurhanizah Abdul Rahman

MCA’s Koh Chin Han in a media statement said - "Jakim's failure to see things from a wider perspective will certainly result in serious impingement into the rights of an individual. This will lead towards a divided Malaysian society along religious and/or gender lines. This ironically runs against the justice the religion itself calls for."