COMMENT With the passing of the National Security Council Bill 2015 - Majlis Keselamatan Negara 2015 - resulting in unbridled powers for the country’s governors, in particular the country's leader, with discretionary powers to declare an area a security threat, there is no doubt Malaysia is sailing into unchartered waters with serious threats to freedoms guaranteed under the Federal Constitution.

Until there are safeguards, the bill is a threat to civil liberties, political freedom and the constitution itself. As a House of conscience, the Senate ought to reject it but that will be hoping against hope.

The new law may spell the end of political and civil freedoms as absolute power is handed to the politicians who so far have not reassured citizens they understand and will govern by the standards of their country’s democratic roots and democratic values entrenched in its constitution.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely is not simply a cliche when politicians are given powers beyond which they can handle or deserve and in the dearth of effective checks and balances and with media control and censorship. The de facto banning of Edge publications supports the fact.

In recent times the actions of those politicians and their apparent indifference to accountability, in particular in the 1MDB controversy, should be sufficient grounds for serious concern.

On Aug 31, 1957, the jewel of the British Crown in the Far East was returned to its original owners, the inhabitants of that land known in ancient times as the Golden Peninsula and in modern times as the Federation of Malaya.

It was to signal the end of colonial injustice, but sadly in many instances neo-colonialism, where home-grown politicians behave like their former colonial bullies, negates all the benefits of self- rule when it becomes "self-abuse".

Backsliding into the past

It is tragic that the country that fought hard to achieve freedom is backsliding into the past, into an era where life is controlled by the whims and fancies of an inner sanctum of political elites and cronies with unbridled powers. Cartel politics is no better than colonialism.

The inhabitants of that land comprising the earliest residents the 'orang asli' and later communities including the major ethno-religious communities - largely Malays and Chinese and the numerically smaller Indians - were part of the British-administered Straits Settlements and Federated Malay States.

There was no tolerance of dissent and the British made laws that still exist, eg the Sedition Act, to silence the people. Such is the rule of law of dictators, which in truth is the rule of force, when the police are used to carry out the political will of the colonialists cum dictators.

The rule of law is negative when the law is bad and lends itself to abuse and devoid of countervailing safeguards and checks and balances.

Under British rule and with the trading acumen of the Chinese and other Oriental communities and indentured Tamil labour, the country then known as the Federation of Malaya prospered because taking care of the rice bowl was of the utmost priority for impoverished citizens. Still there were moves to become independent.

Unlike today, governance then under the Alliance, the forerunner to BN, was preoccupied with establishing a sound national footing for the people to gain a living. Progress was the buzz word. No politician was involved in the public scandals that are a dime a dozen today.

After the Japanese Occupation of Malaya ended with the Allied defeat of Japan in 1945, local Malayan politicians worked to remove the colonial yoke over the country.

The idea of independence albeit to rid the country of colonialism was ultimately to create a prosperous nation for all citizens, not for a select few, for that would be a return to the dark and greedy days of colonialism.

The country eventually achieved independence from British rule and with it came the political birthrights of those who were not born in the nation but eligible to attain citizenship and under the country's new written constitution the supreme law of the land, the country prospered because there was relative genuine power-sharing among the country’s major political parties viz Umno, MCA and MIC in the Alliance Party.

Today there is no evidence of that original power-sharing for the benefit of the represented clientele but only a haunting spectre of political kleptocracy built around a daunting political dogma of self- vesting ‘you scratch my back and I scratch yours’. When uttered unabashedly in public it sounds almost vulgar.

Under the country's moderate Malay nationalist leader who was the true and relatively popular ‘leader for all’ Tunku Abdul Rahman, the country’s first and independence prime minister, led the country rather equitably until he was forced to resign after the bloody political conspiracy of May 1969.

Poetic justice

Some see it as poetic justice former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad has become the country’s foremost critic of the government and dissenter. But whatever his legacy of political infamy or economic vision, he still plays an important role in national life.

More Malaysians than fewer identify with his ideas for accountability in the 1MDB fiasco and the incumbent leadership. And perhaps that may be redemptive to a point of his more shadowy past. Still, Malaysians unless they do more for themselves and their country instead of leaving the few to act and speak for them, will lose their country by default.

The only time the country was under serious threat to its national security besides the time of ‘Emergency’ was during the ‘Konfrontasi’ when Indonesia and the Philippines objected to the formation of Malaysia and Indonesian commandos landed in the country. The country survived without a National Security Council Bill.

Every single known threat to the country’s national security since then has been dealt with more than adequately under existing laws. So why the sudden need for a new draconian security law that is more controlling than the defunct Internal Security Act? If there is public consternation it is understandable.

Draconian laws and duplicitous political promises must be seen as simply that and Malaysians have had bitter tastes. History provides many instances. Most notably, the Japanese failed to pull the wool over our eyes when they concocted the ‘Asia for Asians’ pretext to control South-East Asia’s resources-rich lands for themselves.

Their evil designs and selfish ambitions were seen through by the Malay sultans who though made figureheads as vice-presidents in governing bodies in so-called power-sharing with powers only in regulating Malay affairs and religion, offered limited support, and the Japanese hypocrisy of it all was because many Malayan northern states were given to the Thais to rule.

It was the ultimate insult to Malay political hegemony for the Thais had a long history of trying to subjugate the Malay states but for the protection of the Chinese emperor and then to a lesser degree the British.

Under the duplicitous Japanese rule the Chinese suffered most because of the historic enmity between China and Japan and Malayan Chinese suffered six figure casualties from Japanese atrocities. The country was planted with Chinese blood. Under the late Chin Peng the Chinese and Malays carried out an armed resistance in cooperation with the Allied forces involving Australian commandos.

Great political con job

The great political con job of the Japanese for an ‘Asian co- prosperity sphere’ failed with disastrous consequences for the then militaristic and racist Japanese government. How many con jobs all over the world have failed when their leaders promulgated draconian laws to control the people under the guise of national interest or some spurious excuse can be determined by the eventual failed states of their countries.

Japan’s con job in Asia under an arrogant and two-timing militaristic government failed with disastrous and tragic consequences for Japanese soldiers and civilians.

Malaysia risks entering into the ‘twilight zone’ of an era of political ‘dark ages’ and becoming a ‘failed democracy’ when the rule of law is an euphemism for rule of abuse and the pretext of national security becomes a national con on delivering unbridled powers to those who have not demonstrated they can be trusted with existing power.

Who will protect the politicians, including Umno and government politicians, the civil activists and concerned citizens who have the country’s national interests at heart and are conscientious objectors to bad governance and abuse of power?

Who will protect the country’s national interests and national security when it is hijacked within by those given the powers to govern with integrity, accountability and transparency but do the opposite?

To many a country faces a larger threat from within, from corrupt politicians who destroy the integrity of governance and the country's constitutional freedoms than from any terrorist threat. A terrorist threat will not undermine a nation but a corrupt government and leader will destroy the nation.

Giving a new law to any government that cannot be trusted even with existing powers is like letting loose a bull in a china shop. Expect civil liberties to be smashed to bits and a return to neo-colonialism and a modern day ‘Japanese occupation’ where governance is not democratic but fascist and unjust laws become the dread of the people.

No one who believes in democratic governance and proper checks and balances and an advanced, progressive and developed Malaysia will have the conscience to support the National Security Council Bill now awaiting Senate approval.

The passing of the bill will place a Damocles sword over the head of every conscientious objector who opposes those that abuse the powers of the state for personal gain.

In a nutshell the law is against natural justice. With the repealed ISA an aggrieved internee can still sue the government. But the new bill gives the government a carte blanche power to be absolute.

When challenging the leader is deemed a national threat and enables him to use the law against his opponents whoever they are, then the threat to national security is ironically the law that enables him to do it.

Will the bill when enacted be the real threat to national freedom and national security?

STEVE OH is the author of the novel ‘Tiger King of the Golden Jungle’ and composer of the musical of the same title. He believes in good governance and morally upright leaders.

.

Related reports

Unconstitutional, Suhakam trounces NSC bill

'Gov't has lost some trust from people with NSC Bill'

New law a threat to national freedom and security?