I just posted up a comment (first eh, do I get a prize?) at the article i sighted at malaysiansmustknowthetruth.blogspot.com:)
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Is MCLM an RPK Fan Club?
This is my response to the article below: I have in fact told the MCLM committee that I wish to resign as Chairman of the movement but they have asked me not to do this. If the committee would accept my resignation then I would be most prepared to go. I hope the MCLM committee will reconsider its decision and allow me to resign. I do not want to go just like that and be accused of abandoning the movement. -- Raja Petra Kamarudin
The Malaysian Insider
The MCLM (Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement) claims to be a movement whose mission it is to help bring about political, economic and social reform in Malaysia.
It seems committed to Malaysian opposition politics, considers itself a “father figure” to opposition political parties, and is of the view that the ruling Barisan Nasional is “beyond change and beyond redemption”.
MCLM has, naturally, been wary of the mainstream media for its partiality towards the ruling regime.
Ironically, Raja Petra Kamaruddin (RPK), the movement’s chairman, embraced the mainstream media as an outlet to air his views. He gave a one-hour long interview to TV3, a television station owned by Media Prima, an Umno-linked company.
In the segments of the interview that were aired on TV3, RPK made a number of remarks regarding the Altantuya Shariibu murder case. He also mentioned the names of people he claims are supposedly involved in exposing the wrongdoers, the opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim being one of them.
This interview is seen as have a negative impact on Anwar Ibrahim and to his opposition coalition, Pakatan Rakyat.
Pakatan Rakyat supporters have reacted with shock and have made the angry allegation that RPK has been bribed by the ruling coalition to allow his recorded words to be manipulated to damage the opposition movement.
It appears that RPK had granted TV3 this interview in his own personal capacity.
What is baffling however is that it was MCLM that came out vigorously to defend RPK.
It held a speedy press conference to debunk or expose what it claims is TV3’s spin-doctoring of RPK’s interview. Very subjective claims were made that RPK is unlikely to have been “coerced” into giving an interview since even Special Branch officers “couldn’t break him”.
Whether RPK had allowed himself to be spin-doctored in exchange for favours, whether his interview was an unintended mistake on his part, or whether it is a bit of both, cannot be determined conclusively at the moment. It is not the preoccupation of this letter.
What is positively clear and alarming is MCLM’s curious action of speaking on behalf of RPK in a matter unrelated to MCLM core purpose.
Is MCLM really an independent and professional movement dedicated to its people-centric mission? Or is it a mouthpiece for and protector of RPK, roles nowhere mentioned in MCLM’s charter?
Additional questions surface.
Did RPK conduct the TV3 interview in his capacity as MCLM chairman, which then might justify MCLM acting in his defence? But then again, is it part of MCLM’s constitution that its chairperson give interviews about murder cases or indulge in other speculative scandals that could harm MCLM’s image?
Conversely, if RPK’s interview has nothing to do with MCLM, then why did the president of MCLM choose to defend RPK using MCLM as a vehicle for doing so instead of doing it purely in his personal capacity without involving MCLM?
This has confused the general public and MCLM supporters.
It has alarmed civil society NGOs that have backed MCLM.
It is now being asked whether MCLM is an organisation with a secondary, ulterior purpose of furthering the goals of a specific individual.
Neither does MCLM’s official website help allay these doubts. Its main page prominently features photographs and videos of RPK. As perception is an important thing, why cannot MCLM design a less controversial front page? This is not to say it shouldn’t feature anybody at all. But there is far less harm (and greater relevance) in displaying its potential election candidates, for example. Why the photo of its chairman, and a controversial chairman at that, as a fixture?
In my view, RPK’s cavalier involvement with the underbelly of scandals and controversies is not fitting for a person who is supposed to conduct himself professionally as chairman of a civil liberties movement that is supposed to be taken seriously.
In addition to the foregoing, MCLM’s peculiar move to come out in full force to defend what is the personal action of an individual unrelated to MCLM’s core goals has damaged MCLM’s reputation in the eyes of those it crucially seeks to woo and aid.
Having attempted to do damage control for an individual, it is the resulting damage to its reputation which MCLM must now seek to control.
First, therefore, to partially restore any lost confidence in MCLM, will RPK do the honourable thing, as Japanese prime ministers are accustomed to doing upon any whiff of dishonour or scandal, by resigning as chairman of MCLM for the sake of MCLM’s future?
Or is RPK so dispensable to MCLM that he will continue, like the Chief Minister of Sarawak, as one of its top leaders even at the risk of continued erosion of confidence and support?
Is there no other Malaysian better suited to occupying MCLM’s chairmanship?
Second, will MCLM clarify what exactly is its function? All the pro-people documents it has on its website do not seem to tell the full story given this episode. Is it an organisation dedicated to debunking media spin for individuals it considers special, or will MCLM adhere strictly to its People’s Declaration and regard only the Malaysian people as special?
MCLM claims to hold Pakatan Rakyat to higher standards. RPK has spoken about Anwar Ibrahim being a liability to Pakatan Rakyat. Now that RPK is seen as a liability to MCLM, Will MCLM and RPK step up to the plate, walk their talk, come clean, do the right thing?
Given our lack of political organisations that inspire and have real integrity, we who hold high hopes for MCLM as a true standard-setter in opposition politics are not in the mood for another disappointment.
* Johnny B. Good reads The Malaysian Insider.
Posted by Malaysians Must Know the TRUTH
_____________________________________________________________
********************* Desi's comment, with slight correction...my apologies to web admin of the site!)
"Well said, johnny B good. RPK was clearly seen preaching one which and doing quite the opposite, and this TV3 interview just confirmed several actions of his inconcsistent behaviour since late last year when I tried to "ngage" with him as fellow Bloggers, but instead of sticking to the issues I raised, he concocted allegations against me to put me into trouble with the law. Haris Ibrahim must also step down as MCLM President. Anyway, the issue of bpth cahirman and President resigning is "inconsequential" as far as I can see -- the new infant died soon after childbirth last October.
Just about six months old, it wants to be "father to opposition parties" as Haris defence of RPK's indefensible is like teaching the established parties , haris ibrahim and MCLM-- give up advice!like DAP,Pas, and even 12-year-old PKR, (CORRECTION of following phrase...--YL, Desi) how to suck eggs,No?"
No comments:
Post a Comment