|
 ©New
Straits Times (Used by permission)
by Azura Abas
KUALA LUMPUR: It is unethical to don the mantle of government other than through
the ballot box, says DAP vice-chairman Tunku Abdul Aziz Ibrahim.
In disagreeing with the idea of forming a government by
asking politicians to switch sides, he said: "This is really a matter not so
much of politics but really to do more with ethics in politics.
"There is no law to stop people from crossing over from one party to another and
this has happened in Sabah where opposition members crossed over to Barisan
Nasional.
"Still, this does not really give it any legitimacy just because it has happened
before.
"I totally disagree with it. The only way you can really achieve legitimacy to
govern is through the ballot box. As I have said before, there is a time and
place for it.
"The time is the next general election and the place is the
polling station," he told the New Straits Times.
"Corruption is not just about money changing hands. If you bend the existing
system, you are corrupting it.
"The point I am making is that the people who voted for you have certain
expectations from you and the party you represent to protect the interest of the
voters," he said.
Tunku Aziz also warned that when one put ethics on the back burner instead of in
the driver's seat, problems would happen.
"Once we start putting ethics in the driving seat, we will see some improvement
in the way we run our national affairs."
Politicians must put Malaysia first'
Q: What is your view of the crossover plan?
A: If you justify crossing over on the grounds that you will
still continue to perform your duties, that justification really has no ethical
foundation. As Abraham Lincoln once said: "Whatever is morally wrong cannot be
politically right."
So the basis on which you are crossing over is in itself unethical. I am totally
against such a practice because that is tantamount to abandoning democratic
principles which we have all fought for.
In the fight for independence, for example, we were driven by dreams of
political freedom and dreams of democratic practices and principles. And I
despair when I think that politics has come to this because at the end of the
day, whatever we do, particularly in the political arena, is in the area of
public service. What MPs and state assemblymen are supposed to do is to perform
public duties in the public interest.
Q: If the purported mass crossover happens, what are the reasons behind it?
A: I think the reasons are simply to gain an instant change
of government and whether the process is legitimate or otherwise isn't really
the point.
We have to consider: is this really how we want to portray the practice of
politics in our own country. Of course, I regard this as assuming the mantle of
government through the back door.
Q: What are the possible backlash effects of crossovers to Pakatan Rakyat and
DAP in the long run, if any?
A: Well, if all cross over then the BN government will be out in the cold, which
is an obvious scenario. But if this happens, I will not be a party to this,
because my position is very clear: I will not support it; I will not go along.
Q: In this respect, are you going to be the voice of reason in Pakatan
Rakyat?
A: I will certainly be the dissenting voice on this particular issue in Pakatan
Rakyat.
Q: With existing uncertainties in the country's politics, more and more
people are getting tired by the yet-to-be fulfilled promises that Pakatan Rakyat
will form the government. What is your view?
A: I agree that there's a climate of uncertainty in the country, not only on the
political front but now on the economic front as well. On the economic issue, we
are very much affected by what is going on in the American financial system. But
whatever it is, this uncertainty must be resolved quickly because it is not
doing the country any good at all.
The perception internationally is that this country is becoming ungovernable.
That is the impression created overseas, and this is unhealthy. Politicians on
both sides of the political divide must put Malaysia first.
I'd like to see every political party adopt this model: that we must direct all
our energies towards improving the political climate in this country.
Q: What are the main sentiments of DAP leaders and its members regarding the
crossovers?
A: The DAP is not a monolithic organisation as it is made up of a lot of
members. And, in the nature of things, there will be different views on this.
From what I have seen and heard, there are a lot of people, across the whole
spectrum, who feel crossing over is not a long-term solution. Sustainability is
important and we should not go for short-term gains because they will not make
the impact that we hope for in order to bring about change to the lives of the
people.
Q: Since you have joined DAP and been appointed as the party's vice-chairman,
are you still able to voice frank views about matters related to Pakatan Rakyat,
including the crossovers?
A: My colleagues in DAP have always known me as an independent person. I am my
own man and the fact that I have now joined a political party will not change my
views on public ethics and morality. These are non-negotiable as far as I am
concerned.
Q: In your past columns in the New Straits Times, you have been quite
critical and vocal about political leaders, including Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's
theatrical acts. With current developments, what is your stand on this?
A: I stand by every word that I have written in my column. So those views remain
intact. I joined DAP because it is a very democratic party. One of the
principles of democracy is freedom of speech. Dissenting views are part and
parcel of that process.
Q: Have you been asked by your colleagues to tone down?
A: No, no, no. They have been very open. I have been watching them for a very
long time. Over the years, they have changed. They are not as strident and
doctrinaire as they used to be. They are trying very hard to become a truly
multiracial party. If there were more Malays in DAP, there would be a much
better understanding of what DAP is all about.
The Malays view DAP as being shrouded in some mystery. It is seen as a
chauvinistic Chinese party quarrelling over ridiculous issues like the wearing
of songkok. This is one side of the DAP psychology, but they are mainly
concerned with substantive national issues. We should not write them off as
another lot of rabble-rousing political misfits.
 |
News/Articles/Notices 
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Circular No 023/2012: Talk on ISO 9001 | 2008 Quality Management System Certification
This idea / decision has everything to do with politics and nothing to do with ethics in politics.
Afterall, is there any ethics in politics? Many politicians are lacking in principles, merely thriving on politics. By their politics and power through politics, ethics is completely forgotten. Do not blame 'ethics' or the lack of it for any political decision.
Tan Peek Guat