All institutions of governance in our country namely the police, civil service and judiciary genuflect to the will of this oligarchy which is Umno.
Newly resigned DAP vice-chief Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim, being the intelligent man he is, should have known that you must not give succour to a corrupt oligarchy which has been responsible for the systemic rot in our country.
Sadly however, this is exactly what he did, either knowingly or unknowingly.
Tunku must have known that Stadium Merdeka was offerred as a venue for Bersih 2.0 but at the last minute the permit was rescinded.
This year Bersih 3.0 was not going to fall for the same trap. No doubt they also wanted to show that the rakyat meant business and saw no reason why they could not assemble peacefully at Dataran Merdeka (Freedom Square).
The very name 'Freedom Square' could not be a more apt place to gather to clamour for free and fair elections.
Surely the denial of this venue and using the courts and police to barricade the area smacks of deliberate sabotage.
Why was this lost on Tunku Aziz? Did he not see an undemocratic 'hidden hand' here? Why did he not criticise the government for its unreasonableness?
By criticising Bersih, he instead undermined the noble will of the rakyat who merely wanted to uphold the democratic process.
The issue of 'breaking the law' arose because the corrupt oligarchy determines what the law is. In this respect Tunku Aziz has shown his naiveity and appalling lack of judgement on the real issues at stake.
A rogue regime will abuse the judiciary and police to maintain its hegemony. Legality can never override justice in its true sense.
A rogue regime often hides under the cover of 'legality' to justify injustice.
In any case Bersih co-chair Ambiga Sreenevasan had categorically stated that the rallygoers would abide by the court ruling and not breach the barriers erected.
Therefore, Tunku Aziz's negative comments about Bersih 'breaking the law' was an unforgivable slur on Bersih and not surprisingly was music to Umno's ears.
Rather than trying to obviate any potential violence, Tunku Aziz's comments to my mind gave moral justification for the police to act in the way they did, which was with disproportionate violence.
Using Tunku Aziz's logic or more aptly illogic, the anti-apartheid demonstrations in South Africa, and Gandhi's protest marches throughout India opposing colonial rule should not have taken place because they were 'illegal'.
Similarly, he would regard German citizens protecting Jews facing deportation to the death camps wrong in doing so because the Jews were 'enemies of the state' and it was 'illegal'.
Why hasn't Tunku Aziz criticised the police for firing tear gas and water cannon on a dispersing crowd outside the barricade?
Why were police chasing people, bashing up innocent bystanders and breaking recording devices outside the barricade?
Why has he been silent as a Trappist monk over these gross abuses only to find his voice today by resigning from the DAP and to reiterate his unconscionable position over Bersih 3.0 on a pro- government TV channel?
I was suspicious of Tunku Aziz's negative comments regarding Bersih 3.0 because it came so late in the day and I noticed that he did not once question why the powers that be considered Dataran Merdeka to be an unsuitable venue.
I was waiting for him to go all the way and resign from the DAP and he did not disappoint like a true Umno trojan.
It is no coincidence that Tunku Aziz's involvement in Transparency International has coincided with ever worsening corruption in Malaysia.
Malaysians should move on and not be sidetracked by duplicitous, self-serving and puffed-up individuals with democratic pretensions.