Tarik Balik!: Dignity in Malaysian Parliament
Tarik Balik!: Dignity in Malaysian Parliament
On 19 September 2023, the Malaysian Parliament erupted in loud shouting that lasted for 20 minutes. In this chaotic video, many observations can be gleaned about ideas of decorum, dignity and respect in Malaysian culture and how these ideas fall apart when contested on the public stage.
During the debate, the Parliament discussed Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s corruption case, which concluded in early September with a temporary discharge of 47 graft charges until further evidence is provided to the prosecution. Prime Minister (PM) and Member of Parliament (MP) of Tambun, Anwar Ibrahim, defended his refusal to question the court’s decision. This caused members of the opposition party (Perikatan Nasional) to laugh.
~ ~ ~
Anwar Ibrahim : Bila Peguam Negara buat keputusan, saya tanya dia, betul. Saya bukan bincang keputusannya. Saya tanya apa alasan. Itu dia begi 11 alasan. Saya minta penjelasan dia. Can you defend? [Gelak] You boleh gelak. You boleh gelak Putrajaya kerana you buat pekara itu. [Jerit kuat] Masa pentadbiran you buat pekara itu! Yes! Yes!
Radzi Jidin : Ini sangkaan jahat 36 (6). Saya mahu tarik balik! Tarik balik Perdana Menteri!
Anwar Ibrahim : Takde tarik balik!
~ Translation ~
Anwar Ibrahim : When the AG made the decision, I asked him. I didn’t discuss the matter with him. I asked him to explain the reasons. He gave me 11 reasons. I asked him for clarifications. “Can you defend it?” [Laughs]. You can laugh Putrajaya, but you [points towards Radzi Jidin] did the same thing. [Loud shouting]. During your (Perikatan National) administraion you did the same thing! Yes! Yes!
Radzi Jidin : This is a false accusation which is against Section 36 (6) [of the Standing Orders of the Dewan Rakyat, Parliament of Malaysia]. I want you to take it back! Take it back, Prime Minister!
Anwar Ibrahim : I’m not taking it back!
~ ~ ~
Ibrahim accused “Putrajaya” of doing the “same thing.” However, the “thing” was not clarified and “Putrajaya” was obscured during the debate. The “thing” could be assumed to be upholding the court’s ruling when it favoured one’s party. Alternatively, it could be assumed to be the unconstitutional influence of the executive branch on judicial cases. In any case, the MP of Putrajaya, Dr Radzi Jidin, believed this to be a false allegation based on zero evidence. Moreover, “Putrajaya” could be an assumed reference to the Jidin. This is because Ibrahim pointed directly at him and it is common practice to refer to fellow Parliamentarians as their constituency. However, Ibrahim later clarified that he meant the administration of Putrajaya, i.e., the incumbent government. The Leader of Opposition (MP of Larut) Hamzah Zainudin argued that Ibrahim conveniently redefined his meaning of “Putrajaya” to avoid the consequences of making an infraction of the rules of debate. Section 36 (6) of the Standing Orders of the Dewan Rakyat, Parliament of Malaysia, states that “No member shall impute improper motives to any other member.” This means it would be permitted to accuse the previous administration of “doing the same thing” but it would be an infraction to accuse an individual member of doing so.
The twenty-minute screaming match is a painful but entertaining eruption of emotion and a loss of decorum. Jidin repeatedly screamed “Tarik balik! Ini maruah saya!” which translates to “Take it back! This is about my dignity!” Ibrahim’s comments demonstrably hurt Jidin, he even looked like he was on the verge of tears. Backbenchers, such as MP of Sungai Petani, Mohammed Taufiq Johariand, and MP of Hulu Langat, Mohd Sany Hamzan, worsened the disagreement. They frequently interrupted and shouted, “Putrajaya, sit down!” This created a disruptive cacophony of sounds which painful to witness. The Speaker of the House, Dr Johari Abdul, frequently exclaimed, “Sit down! I will make the decision.” But people refused to listen to the orders of Abdul, and Jidin doubled down on his refusal by saying, “The Speaker must be fair! I will not sit until you have reached a fair decision.” After the Speaker decided to take Ibrahim at his word (“Putrajaya” as in the previous administration), Jidin asked, “How can this be? It’s not fair!” Adbul asked Jidin sternly, “Are you challenging me?” Then, he commanded, “Putrajaya, get out!” Later, MP of Gopeng, Tan Kar Hing, cleverly repurposed “tarik balik” and asked Jidin to apologise for verbally challenging the Speaker and breaking the rules of debate. Jidin and most of the opposition party left Parliament to protest the Speaker’s decision and Ibrahim’s failure to rescind his accusation against Jidin. Before the walkout, the shouting escalated until it became a spectacle of ridicule, even by their own colleagues. Some people laughed hysterically in the background; Parliamentarians took videos of others losing their temper; MP of Muar, Syed Saddiq, visibly held back his laughter during this match.
The twenty-minute screaming match revealed what and how Malaysian politicians think about decorum, respect and dignity. Decorum is important for debates to run smoothly and efficiently, but they are important because they are the rules that govern the debate, and rules should be adhered to. Many parliamentarians repeatedly referred to their copy of the Standing Orders to rudely remind each other of the expectations of decorum. Respect was expected to be given to their colleagues as it was embedded in the rules of decorum, especially respecting the speaker’s decisions. Dignity was to be defended, especially when a politician was wrongly accused of corruption and overstepping legislative and executive powers. However, in the fight to defend and uphold these three ideals, none of them were upheld at all.
The debate lacked any decorum. The debate was analogous to young children screaming at the playground, complaining to an adult why it would be unfair to allow another child to have another turn on the swing. The Speaker was akin to the adult, trying to mediate the situation and calm everyone. Because there was no decorum, there was no respect, and the debate was petty, unprofessional, and personal. In fact, Jidin called Ibrahim a “sodomizer,” even though Ibrahim has been royally pardoned for his two sodomy charges. Arguably, Jidin has lost some dignity in the public’s eye. He did not react like a composed, refined stately man, and his fierce reaction might be interpreted as overly defensive, in the wake of corruption allegations from his previous tenure as the Minister of Education.
However, this rupture of procedure and decorum implicated Jidin’s actions, as well as his colleagues, who enabled and escalated the reactions to the point of ridicule. Hence, this moment in Malaysian Parliamentary history demonstrates the paradoxical nature of self-dignity among Malaysian politicians. Dignity is so important it requires reckless abandon to defend it while simultaneously losing it. However, the walk-out – the protest – offered Jidin and his supporters a way to hold onto the shred of dignity they had and collectively say they refused to be disrespected in the chambers of Parliament. In this act, they have been able to “tarik balik” (take back) their dignity, although fragmented and cheapened.
Sources:
https://www.thevibes.com/articles/news/98851/pn-mps-walk-out-during-anwars-explanation-on-dnaa
https://www.thevibes.com/articles/news/99043/radzis-unbecoming-conduct-disrespects-the-kings-pardon