THE reminder by the Regent of Perak, Raja Dr Nazrin Shah, on the need to understand the basis and role of the Malay ruler and the royal institution in the administration of our nation is not only timely but vital in ensuring Malaysians understand the reasons behind and purpose of their existence, particularly so in the changing political scenario brought about by the demands for a “more liberal and democratic Malaysia” and the agenda for a “Malaysian Malaysia”.

The Malay rulers and the royal institution have a role to play in the administration of our nation.

It is my hope that the rulers will play a more responsible and proactive role.

In their desire to see a more “liberal and democratic” Mal-aysia, some Malaysians, due to their lack of appreciation and understanding of the existence and role of the Malay rulers and the royal institution, have questioned the need for their existence.

The royal institution constitutes one of the constitutional foundations of our nation. It is acknowledged that it is not perfect in the discharge of its role and function.

This imperfection, however, lies not in the institution itself but in the way the role and function of the institution is carried out.

Likewise the parliament. Not all parliamentarians can claim to be free of corruption and imperfections. However, the existence of the institution of parliament is important in our democratic system of government.

In calling for a more “liberal and democratic” Malaysia, the advocates have either intentionally or unintentionally overlooked the fundamental provisions of the Federal Constitution and, to some extent, expressed disrespect and disdain for these provisions.

We agree that many changes must take place to make Malaysia a better place for Malaysians.

Malays must realise that the New Economic Policy is not meant for eternity.

They must reassess and re-evaluate themselves. They must ask themselves how much longer they need to depend on the NEP.

They must meet the challenges that lie ahead and compete with the rest. They must rid themselves of the subsidy mentality.

In short, Malays must clean up their act.

I believe the NEP is relevant as there are many Malays who need the assistance of the policy.

However, the clamour for the repeal of the policy, coming especially from some Malays, is discomforting.

Particularly so when these Malays, who are now successful, are the very ones who exploited the policy to the fullest and benefited the most even though they may not have been deserving.

It is widely acknowledged that the policy has weaknesses. Again, it is acknowledged that the weaknesses lie not in the policy but its implementation.

What needs to be done, therefore, is not to scrap the policy but to review its implementation.

Riding on the crest of the dissatisfaction of the public over many issues, certain states now administered by non-Barisan Nasional parties have announced that they will no longer implement the NEP and seek to replace the policy with one of their own.

It is well and good if the new policy can address the economic and other problems faced by the multiracial communities.

However, it must be remembered that the NEP was introduced for good reasons and it behoves those who seek to repeal the policy to ensure that whatever new policy they seek to introduce will bring about the desired result.

We, the people, are awaiting to see what the new policy is all about.

Time and again, Malays have been reminded of the so-called “social contract”.

However, those who have been issuing these reminders seem to have overlooked the fact that the so-called “social contract” has been replaced with the Federal Constitution, which spells out the rights of the communities.

There are always two sides to the coin. There will always be differing views.

The newly-appointed de facto minister for law has promised to uphold the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary, the separation of powers and the supremacy of the law. I welcome such assurances.

However, the view of the minister on issues such as freedom of religion is well known and documented, and Muslims groups are concerned about his stand.

It is hoped that the minister, in carrying out his promise to uphold the supremacy of the law and the constitutional guarantees such as freedom of religion, will be willing to listen to the other side.

ZAINUR ZAKARIA, Kuala Lumpur

Source: NST – March 24, 2008