Berani dalam Benar, Habis manis, sepah dibuang

The above words of wisdom, meaning “once the sweetness is gone, the remains are wasted” or simply “taking advantage of a situation or opportunity without remorse” was used recently by a senior politician and minister to describe the souring of relationships leading to a resignation from the party.” Yet just last week, two more incidencescan be cited in the same light that further boggles the mind, as though we have not learnt anything as the political scenario becomes even more MADANI-ing (= maddening, pronounce: madənɪŋ) by the day.

First, when a person representing an ethnic-based well-established organisation reprimanded another person who was reportedly a former member (as life member for some 15 years) in the same organisation “to renounce his Malaysian citizenship and emigrate due to his divisive comments” – seeming directed to said organisation which they belong as well. This however is not new because the person concerned is well-known to be provocative for a long time, and controversial to say the least, like several others that could be named. What is new is that he was asked to renounce his citizenship and emigrate. On the contrary, the others are celebrated as heroes – no need to emigrate!

Yet, many emigated on their own freewill without being nudged as such, and for less “provocative” and “controversial” reasons so to speak as implied.The majority could be described as taking advantage, and remaining ungrateful. They too are “unable to live in a peaceful, harmonious, diverse and inclusive Malaysia.” This is no secret, and is said to be on-going due to some ethnically implied reasons of sorts. Here, it is always understood to involve persons from more than one ethnic group. It is deemed as a racist issue by those affected. In the case when the same ethnic group is involved in the clash, the rule somehow does not apply. Hence, there are supports by members of another organisation which has a majority of the same ethnic group. Ironically, the person targeted in this case, regarded it as “racist,” given the  “ultra” perspective, according to his reading. In fact, he reminded the “ultra” counterparts to grasp the right fundamentals correctly foremost before “we discuss who should return to China,” which the other side failed to locate the destination for some unknown reason(s), despite being pointed in its intent.

Hence, for once it looks like the “racist” label can be applied to any particular race, person or organisation despite their claim otherwise; no matter how (un)coloured! If it is part of the government apparatus, then the “racist” label follows! This reality is now staring at our faces as it gets even more maddening as time passes! The very fact that the person concerned was acceptable as a life member for some 15 years before resigning in 2016, allegedly due “frustration” of not giving a chance “to serve as an internal bridge,” instead “claiming they viewed him as a threat,” speaks volume of the dubious state of the accusation per se! The issue boggles the mind even further as to who is unable to accept whom in the first place?

The second episode is somewhat similar, involving an organisation against an individual who is also an active contributing member by virtue of being an elected first-term parliamentarian. And served eight years in the top decision-making council. Still, beyond the voters in his constituency, he was virtually unknown, unlike the former case. That is, until his story springs into the open recently, when he was reportedly suspended for three years – after allegedly being seen at an event of another organisation, which was held in his constituency. Sounds like a desperate excuse, if not undemocratic, to say the least, let alone from a reformist viewpoint. Accordingly, he is not only suspended, but also “defunded [for a sum of RM3 million], and politically neutralised — as being forced to sit silently like a stump.” A waste for a reformist-minded YB, who has been voicing the concern of his voters and supporters on issues like the Urban Renewal Act, the monopoly structure in Malaysia’s foreign worker management system, and the Sales and Service Tax framework.” He reckoned that these are the actual cause of the suspension instead of “failing to protect the party’s name and reputation” which he outright disputed.

True to habis manis, sepah dibuang , other unsubstantiated accusations were suddenly aired. Like the previous case, despite spending more than 15 years with the organisation, disillusionment with the leadership and its handling of recent controversies prompted him to resign. The remarks he made that “he can no longer work with leaders who are unwilling to correct the party’s mistakes,” tells it all as in the first case. He was quoted as accusing them of prioritising the preservation of their positions, including by the head of the organisation who seems to be partial in the hearsay that he had not attended meetings over a year. And even suggested to “part ways amicably.” To this the counter claim is not so much about the “missing” of so-called meetings, but rather the mis-reading that he actually “had reduced involvement because issues like corporate mafia with the party” – involving not less RM9 million – that he raised and apparently “ignored.”

A Facebook post recently reiterated: "I did not distance myself without reason. I became less active after the corporate mafia issue I raised through internal channels was ignored." The accusation is therefore “inaccurate. It diverts attention from the root cause of this situation,” he added.

"To this day, no action has been taken. Instead, I, who pushed for the issue to be investigated, was the one who was restricted and punished.” As early as April, after meeting the prime minister and seeking a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI), he claimed: “No action was taken! This is more than just mind-boggling! A maddening darkness, no doubt.