MGG Pillai Commentary View

<< Previous || Next >>

Rafidah Aziz has her day in Parliament, and proves it is 'us' versus 'them' in the National Front

PARLIAMENT HAS BECOME A charade. The MPs from the ruling National Front are not given a free vote in the Rafidah Aziz affair. The two NF MPs who voted with the Opposition in referring Datin Seri Rafidah Aziz to the Committee of Privileges comes up for mention in newspaper reports and in Paliament as if they had done something terrible. It now seems the National Front never had any intention to put Rafidah Aziz through the hoop. She knows it, and almost every NF MP knows it. The result was predictable, although Parliament was allegedly given a free hand by the NF. The NF's majority in Parliament would see, as it turned out, that Datin Seri Rafidah would get into no trouble. And indeed she did not. She is in the New Straits Times today (6 October 2005) talking about her role in nation building, and that she viewed her international role more important than turning up in Parliament. Parliament is not important, she avers in the interview with New Straits Times. The leader of the Opposition, Mr Lim Kit Siang, is irrelevant, so his questions are less important than the Cabinet's. But in the Parliamentary system of government in force, it is more important than the cabinet. Tun Mahathir used to have cabinet meetings in Parliament. He at least paid lip service to the primacy of Parliament. The Natioanl Front does not. There is pressure on the National Front to penalise the two MPs who voted with the Opposition. And there is a collective sigh of relief that she is scot free. That was only possible by the massive majority the NF has in Parliament.

Datin Seri Rafidah went on a charm offensive, once it became clear that she had no choice but to face Parliament. But in her statement, in and out of Parliament, she spoiled her own case. She said that AP (approved permits to buy non-Malaysian made cars) were only given to companies. This may be true, but the question of APs became an issue because she allegedly gave her son-in-law APs, enough to make him a millionaire every month. She says now that only companies are given APs. If that was so, why was Tun Mahathir's son, and MPs, singled out in her defence? Tun Mahathir's son runs Eurocars, which imports Saab and Porche cars. She should have mentioned Eurocars and not Tun Mahathir's son. But she hoped that this would stop the attacks on her. She has as many creative reasons as President Bush has in invading Iraq. I am not saying Tun Mahathir is a saint, but his son is mentioned for no reason than to stop the attacks. She wants to look good, does not want to be looked as one who made use of her position for her own (or son-in-law's) wealth. Parliament may have absolved, and got her off the hook, but the people remember the verbal gymnastics she did to justify her giving APs to her son-in-law.

The cabinet told her to 'face the music' in Parliament. She kept telling to all who would listen, especially the Bernama news agency, that she was on 'important' business overseas, that she was representing the country, and by inference Parliament could wait. But Parliament was also part of the nation, and an MP elected, as she is, has her first priority to attending its sessions. She took care of the Pak Lah cabinet by giving APs to members of it so that if she were investigated, so would they. Pak Lah and his advisers decided that Datin Rafidah should face Parliament on the AP issue, knowing fully well that the National Front had the majority in Parliament. The NF MPs were told to clear her. But the two MPs who voted against her is indicative of the problems within the Front. The government and cabinet cannot be made of the NF leaders, and once appointed, do as they like. Which is how the NF government and cabinet runs. Datin Seri Rafidah problem in Parliament, and her rantings afterwards, only highlighted this. Approved permits, contrary to what Datin Seri Rafidah now says, is given to 'important' people in the NF. It is not available to you and me. The APs are one way that 'us' and 'them' are kept apart in NF and its main party, UMNO.

A cabinet minister, seated next to her in cabinet, asked for APs to be given to the co-operatives he ran, and one each for each cooperative branch would make each one profitable. But he was not useful to her, so she told him in the tone she now adopts that she does not give out APs except to comapanies, and that there are procedures that he would have to follow. He is no longer in the cabinet. He is aligned to Tun Mahathir, he is out of a job now, so her political instincts were right in refusing the APs to the co-operatives. But there are so many stories like these that I have been told over the years that the problem of APs and Datin Seri Rafidah would not go away – not in UMNO, not in NF, and certainly not among the Malays.

Datin Seri Rafidah had a much publicised meeting with Tun Mahathir after the AP problem was aired in public. She was adamant she did not apologise to Tun Mahathir. But in what language did she speak with Tun Mahathir? They would have spoken in Malay, as he would normally to a Malay. 'Minta maaf' in Malay means more than a mere apology; the words have cultural connotations. One apologies all the time when speaking in Malay. Was Datin Seri Rafidah speaking to the non-Malay press when she said she did not apologise to Tun Mahathir? Or was she painting herself as an non-Malay in wriggling out of the problem? Tun Mahathir is older to her, and 'minta maaf' is normal for a younger person to an older. She would improve her argument in this matter if she tells the language she spoke in when she spoke to Tun Mahathir?

All these questions would be asked in the next general elections. Not by those in authority in Kuala Lumpur, but by the people up and down the country, certainly in the Kuala Kangsar parliamentary constitutency she represents. Being in the cabinet is seen as a life-time job in Malaysia. She has given adequate proof, by her own example, that it is profitable as well. She is in the doghouse because it fits in with Pak Lah's claim that he is against corruption, and money grabbing. He points to Tun Mahathir's people, who have no power, as the guilty one. But he was part of the Tun Mahathir cabinet, as Datin Seri Rafidah was, and he should have brought it to his attention at the time, not now, when Tun Mahathir is out of office. I disagree with Tun Mahathir remaining in politics, against Pak Lah, though he represents a point of view that is not heard. But he has his reasons, and they must be respected. But that he is in power makes Pak Lah and Datin Seri Rafidah think twice before venturing out. As the charade in Parliament over Datin Seri Rafidah showed.

M.G.G. Pillai
pillai@streamyx.com