Protesters of the merger between PRM and KeADILan were often branded emotional, childish and sectarian. A recent [#1] Readers Comments[/#] conducted by malaysiakini indicated clearly that the public supported the proposal of a merger between the two parties.

However, it was a pleasant surprise to find that there were various factions which shared various sentiments when discussing the above issue at the PRM National Congress last Saturday at the Grand Olympic Hotel, KL. In fact the sentiments were split, you could say 50-50 or at least 48-52 (a slight bend towards acceptance of the merger).

The youth wing also had a split vote whereby out of five members who were chosen to attend the National Congress, two were for the merger, two against and one did not vote.

It was understandable then that the debate was highly charged with emotions, good emotions for the one thing that surfaced was crystalline, irrefutable and that is: that party members held PRM's ideals very dear to their hearts. Every member loved PRM as if it was their flesh and blood and to give it up or even the idea of sharing it was not only a political choice, it was a difficult choice as it meant for some that there would be the end of a glorious history of struggles for justice, democracy and good governance.

During the course of discussion when views were aired with much deliberation, some members with tearful red eyes were spotted, especially those of senior Chinese members who were from the ex-Labour Party.

A quick glance over the kind of members who supported the merger showed that there seemed to be a trend of those supporting the merger to come from those who were more conservative or pro-Islamic.

Those who supported the merger did so on this basis: that PRM's membership was too scanty in numbers and therefore too often marginalised. After years of struggling and conducting various activities as well as strategising towards the future to change the political landscape of the country, PRM did not gain the kind of grassroot support that KeADILan had so successfully managed to do within a short period of time.

The merger supporters felt that the time had come for party members to accept a change. They felt that members must put a leash on their emotions and relinquish their egotist attitude and admit the fact that PRM had its weaknesses. With the merger, PRM could capitalise on KeADILan's positive points like pro-activeness, organisational skills and mass support. On the other hand, the merger could be used as a vehicle to spread PRM's ideology and intensify its struggles for a just and equal society.

The protesters felt that a merger was too premature, too soon at this point of time. There was a unifying consensus though that the protest was not over the issue of a merger per se but what form of a merger was the issue at stake. Four kinds of mergers were put forward by the central committee in a working paper prepared by vice-president Rustam Sani, "Hubungan PRM dan KeADILan - Beberapa Pertimbangan dan Pilihan", viz:

(a) a closer cooperation between the two parties without a formal structure; where the two parties would maintain and work towards strengthening their memberships and leadership while cooperating closer with the other;

(b) a front or a confederation like the Socialist Front in the 60s where PRM and the Labour Party were members; this proved successful as the front did gain some seats during the 1969 general elections but were crippled by the ruling party when the leaders were arrested under ISA and thrown into jail;

(c) a merger where one party has to dissolve in order to join the other; an impossible choice for this would cause unnecessary distress to the sentiments of both parties' members;

(d) the dissolution of two parties and the birth of a new party: a proposal that reflected a little more fairness but would bring about other problems like the hassle of getting the party registered and the drafting of a new constitution that needed the agreement and endorsement of both parties.

There was a trend to support proposal (b) or (d), that is a front or dissolve both parties and set up a new one. Members felt a front was workable as that would give both parties a chance to get to know each other, to see if it was possible to work together at all and if it was possible then a merger would be most appropriate and acceptable by all. Someone likened the process to a marriage where it was necessary for a courting period where couples could get to know each other better before taking the plunge.

However, some members felt slighted that the central committee had actually agreed in principle on the issue of a merger before discussing the issue at the Congress but were assured by the central leadership that the proposal was only in its discussion stage and no resolution had been reached thus far.

Secretary general Sanusi Osman assured members that it would probably take six months to one year to finalise the issue of this merger. He also confirmed that any resolution would have to be endorsed by a special congress.

Sanusi added that PRM must also wait for KeADILan to convene its congress and discuss the issue of merger too as there are also supporters for and protesters against the merger.

PIX by COLIN NICHOLAS

Many uncertainties and misgivings were aired as to the motive of KeADILan's invitation to join forces with PRM. Members seemed unconvinced that KeADILan's struggle was "Justice for All" as the "famous" question of KeADILan's struggle for "whom" as in "was it only for Anwar Ibrahim?" was again hurled across the table. A veteran member reminded others that at one point of time, Anwar had remarked somewhere in Johor that "PRM was a dead party and should be thrown into the rubbish bin".

Protesters of the merger felt there was nothing wrong with PRM as its reputation was infallible and its highly respectable leaders sacrificed much for the sake of the rakyat. The party also had a glorious past and historical landscape that time could not erode as chronologically, PRM was even older than Merdeka itself and was instrumental in gaining independence for the country.

There was also a question as to why a merger with DAP was not sought earlier as DAP's ideology ran on similar lines with PRM, that of being left wing, socialist, multi-racial, and had a political past glorified by a long history of struggles. The answer was that DAP had never extended an invitation for closer ties with PRM before so the question of a merger with DAP did not arise.

KeADILan's multi-faction membership was a thorn in the flesh, a nagging issue as protesters recorded their apprehension. With the merger PRM would eventually be just another faction. In wanting to promote multi-racialism in the KeADILan-PRM merger, leaders from both parties may have to deal with impending problems with the various factions. These factions come from different backgrounds, leadership styles and ideologies.

Protesters were wary of the pro-Islamic and ex-Umno members in KeADILan. There were also accusations that some KeADILan members were opportunistic. Recent party-hopping of KeADILan members back into Umno confirmed this fear and some wondered if KeADILan would suffer the ill-fate of Semangat 46.

President Syed Husin Ali explained that KeADILan was different from Semangat 46 in terms of its ideology and political motives. There was an invitation by Semangat 46 to forge an alliance with PRM earlier but the proposal was rejected by PRM as their motives were too obvious.

Where party-hopping was concerned, Syed Husin felt that this was normal in any party as the lure of money, power and position was inevitable. If this happened, it would be considered as good riddance of all the bad hats that were present in the party.

With their departure, the newly merged party would have a membership of a very committed lot of people. This would also automatically neutralise the trend towards the party becoming more Islamic or pro-Malay and would be a driving force to attract more non-Malay and non-Muslim participation.

One of the main reasons for the KeADILan-PRM merger was that PRM's basic struggles for a just society ("masyarakat adil") will finally be able to flow like a stream that would reach the masses, thereby sensitising the public as well as breaking new grounds to develop PRM's ideology.

But protesters argued that this could only happen if PRM had equal partnership within the merger. An equal partnership seemed possible only on paper but in reality protesters feared that PRM would be swallowed by KeADILan by virtue of the fact that the latter's membership outnumbers the former greatly.

To appease protesters, Syed Husin related his experiences when he went around giving ceramah during the last election. The turn-outs from the masses were few though encouraging. With the support of KeADILan, the masses evidently grew and the president felt that he was able to spread his message more widely and more effectively. Therefore, the question of an equal partnership was possible as Syed Husin felt support from the masses was a force to be reckoned with and its benefits to PRM would be boundless.

A new political culture mentioned in Rustam's working paper needed clarification, mentioned one protester. Rustam retorted that the new political culture was already spelt out clearly in his paper and that is a culture that promotes justice, democracy, a fair and transparent governance and rejection of all politics based on race or religion. This culture would be the basis of the merger between PRM and KeADILan.

As to the question of whether the merger was too soon and would it look like as though PRM was begging to be accepted by KeADILan, Rustam answered that there was no such thing as the issue of a merger came about in a pleasant manner, discussed by both party leaders, even proposed by Anwar Ibrahim. There was never a situation where KeADIlan wooed PRM or vice versa. The issue arose because both parties felt that they would gain much in terms of party building and enhancing future programs to bring about change in the country.

Finally, members were requested by a youth member to ponder on a few questions like, (1) other than ideals, ideology and history, what are the concrete steps that PRM could take to empower the party if it does not consider merging with KeADIlan and, (2) if PRM is not ready for a merger yet when will it ever be ready? There is a fear that when PRM is finally ready, will KeADILan lose its enthusiasm and interest in merging with PRM?

In his closing speech, Syed Husin assured members that motives for the merger were honourable. He was aware that there were talks about leaders being tired to carry on the struggle or that leaders were probably opportunistic in wanting the merger. Syed Husin's firm resolution was this: that if the leaders were tired and opportunistic, they would not have joined or remained in PRM all this while. They would have joined the ruling party!

As to the many fears and wariness that was aired, Syed Husin advised that if people were burdened with too many fears then changes would never take place and old failures would continue to hurt the party.

Syed Husin reminded party members that the real enemy was BN and it was time to arrange a stronger fortress to combat BN's destructive policies of ruling the country with politics based on exploiting racial and religious sentiments.

Love for the party was evident in all the arguments that were raised and Syed Husin was pleased that such sentiments existed but love for the party was insufficient if members did nothing about it or did not want to effect changes that would improve the party in general.

At last, Syed Husin called for a consensus on the resolution to:

a) Agree in principle to merge PRM with KeADILan;

b) Give the mandate to the Central Committee to continue discussion and the process of implementation of the merger between the two parties.

The two resolutions were accepted by representatives at the National Congress although there were some who preferred to cast their votes as that was perceived to be more democratic.

The conclusion was arrived in a calm manner though apprehensions still existed in the hearts and minds of members as they wait for further notice of the merger and its impending implications.

It is time for the "great test" whether racial politics will continue to dominate the political landscape of this country or whether a political party based on equality and justice for all, regardless of race, religion and social standing, be acceptable to the rakyat.

Although uncertain, it is inevitable that implications are bound to arise out of this new enterprise.

SUI YIN is a member of the Parti Rakyat Malaysia.