Q&A: Misquoted on 'burst stomach' remark
Many were appalled when Kelantan Menteri Besar Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat reportedly said he would pray for the prime minister's stomach to "burst" if the latter refuses to channel oil royalty payments to the state.
That outrageous remark eclipsed even the more bizarre bits of advice he had trickled out occasionally - that a vote for is Islamic party PAS is a ticket to heaven; that women who wear lipstick are inviting rape; or that attractive women should marry and stay at home in order not to occupy jobs.
Many were appalled when Kelantan Menteri Besar Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat reportedly said he would pray for the prime minister's stomach to "burst" if the latter refuses to channel oil royalty payments to the state.
That outrageous
remark
eclipsed even the more bizarre bits of advice he had trickled out occasionally - that a vote for is Islamic party PAS is a ticket to heaven; that women who wear lipstick are inviting rape; or that attractive women should marry and stay at home in order not to occupy jobs.
Many Umno leaders were left in shock and with a sense of disbelief, particularly since the statement was from a religious scholar who is revered by politicians and the public alike.
Clarifying the matter in a recent interview with Malaysiakini , however, Nik Aziz claimed that he was a victim of misquoting by some sections of the press.
Excerpts of the interview follow. The content has been edited for language and brevity.
Malaysiakini: The federal government does not appear that it want to budge on payment of the oil royalty. Your response?
Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat: The oil royalty belongs to the people of Kelantan. If there is a dispute, take it to the international court to adjudicate the matter. Why should the federal government hold on to the money? It is not logical. If they give the money to Kelantan, pass it to the state government. Why give it to a (federal agency that) has nothing to do with the state government.
It is as though Kelantan does not have a sultan, legislative assembly or elected representatives. The federal government is doing as it pleases. A real government would have rules. Why are these being ignored?
We as the state government know how to utilise the funds. There were floods recently and the state needs to repair roads and bridges. All this needs money. It is not just the federal government that needs funds.
We are not asking for money from other states. This is (money from) what God had accorded to the state of Kelantan.
So will you take the matter to court?
Of course. I have maintained this position for a long time. We have a prima facie case.
At what stage is it now?
We will leave it at that for now.
Aren't you worried that the case may drag on for years?
That is not important.
Are your legal advisors confident of a win?
There is no case that you cannot take to court, except cases which can't be challenged in court such as detentions under the ISA (Internal Security Act). This case is something that the federal government is aware of.
What are your thoughts on the government's decision to convert oil royalties into wang ehsan (a compassionate fund)?
Wang ehsan is meant for the poor. When it comes to Kelantan, it is not about poverty. It is about our rights. What I want is for the state government to control the funds. You can call it whatever you want. We are better at managing the funds because we are doing it based on Islamic principles. The federal government is based on nationalism. What do they know about religion?
But the Kelantan seems to be at a dead end ...
Not yet. How can they close the doors (on negotiation)? We are a democracy. We don't have a communist or dictatorial system.
The talk about payment appears to have been diverted to your remark that you will pray for the demise of ‘that person' - widely assumed to be Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak - and Umno.
Prayer is a weapon. Prayer has been only used for certain functions. I'm trying to tell people that prayer is the same as religion... There are prayers for every situation. If others are unaware, that is their problem. A true Muslim would know this.
My purpose was to pray so that the federal leaders would open their hearts to returning Kelantan its property (oil royalties). I used to mention him by name, but since he is sensitive, I shall not name him.
I never prayed for his body to be destroyed. I was asking for the demise of his leadership. I was hoping that the voters would spite him.
You then said you would pray for "that person's stomach to burst". What did you mean by that?
That is not a prayer. (During the
Dec 4 rally
) I said that, in the 1990s, the Chinese community was angry with me for introducing licensing of alcohol. They threatened to gather publicly to drink (in protest). So people asked me if they could, and I replied, ‘Yes. Let them drink until their stomachs burst'.
The press reports were wrong. I was giving an example from an old issue...but some newspapers didn't understand. (Some press reports) was intentionally (written) in bad faith.
Would you elaborate on the controversy over your son-in-law's appointment to Kelantan Menteri Besar Incorporated (PMBK)?
When we took over PMBK (in 1990), there were no files (in the office). We didn't know what the previous menteri besar had been doing. After we took over, we appointed someone from Kuala Lumpur as chief executive officer. After he resigned, I appointed my son-in-law (Abdul Ariffahmi Ab Rahman).
At the time, I didn't know that I could not. He was appointed in a full (board) meeting. The LA (legal advisor) was there. I specified in the document that he is my son-in-law, but the LA was silent. So I thought the appointment was valid.
But now, there are people making noise. But I know what I did was right, because the LA was silent. So that is what happened.
To me, it wasn't because he is my son-in-law... he has knowledge. His home is near mine. When he goes for prayers at the mosque, he comes to my house to talk, negotiate (official matters) and pray (together).
So it is easy for you the two of you to meet?
He stays nearby. If my son-in-law stays far away...then I would not have known him. He is young (and) active. So I
sayang
(admire) him because he is active, young and lives nearby. We have known each other for years, perhaps three or four years.
But wasn't it wrong to appoint him to head PMBK?
It is said to be wrong. I didn't know. No one told me (at the time). The LA said nothing. How can you blame me? But now that this is an issue, I have told him to resign.
Is there a possibility that the LA was afraid to speak up?
You should ask him.
(At this point, Nik Aziz ended the interview, saying he was not feeling well.)
Related story: Nik Aziz blames legal adviser over PMBK row


Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.