Friday, September 25, 2009


Was I not surprised to hear that the Ruler of the state of Pahang had asked the people to continue backing the BN government so that “more social, economic and educational development would be implemented for them”, or words to that effect. I first heard about this in the news on TV but ignored it, thinking that there was nothing wrong if a Ruler should voice his support for the government of the day in matters that would benefit the people.

But when a friend called me to seek my views on what the Pahang ruler had actually said, that was reported in the news on TV, I began to realise that something was not right. My friend argued that rulers are above politics and should therefore remain non-partisan. By naming a political party, he is deemed to have acted in a partisan manner, and is therefore playing into the hands of that political party.

My only hope is that the Pahang ruler had made a mistake, and was only making a reference to the government of the day, and not referring it to BN in particular. Or was the news on TV being reported wrongly?

If the TV news report was correct, the ruler will now have to accept being criticised by the public for what the public sees as being a mouth piece of a certain political party. This is exactly what all rulers should avoid doing, if they are to remain a symbol to be respected by all people, regardless of their political affiliation.



FMZam said...

Very good morning Dear Dato',

For a ruler to say that kind of piece, it is a god blessed thing for all the rakyat and a god damned thing for this BN's government. The blessing is that the rakyat have got a reason to do more damning to the BN and the government.

Had the ruler said it the other way round, the newspapers would have certainly say what some of us had said it now, "Rulers please stay out of politics" or words to that effect to remind that all rulers are not supposed to get involved in politics.

There are brave rakyat everywhere in this country who had said bravely like what Anak Sungai Derhaka had put it in his blog in response to the ruler's remark.

Now who are we calling Derhaka! It has been so very simple for UMNO to label a rakyat is Derhaka in the case of Karpal Singh taking a ruler to court and for that matter anyone who goes against a ruler.

I am short of saying that in the context of the term Derhaka, we have no clause for our rulers to be termed as Derhaka, no such thing. But we all have learnt in history, somewhere else in this world, even a king had been punished for being Derhaka to the state and to the people of his own country.

To me, a king has every right to live as a king as long as he gives his own people every right to elect a king and in this case the king is the people, not him. A king is not a king, without his people. We are all his people, like it or not we are all his subjects, be it we are BN or Pakatan Rakyat.

Maj. Ramachandran Ramaswamy Iyer (Retd) said...

Dear Dato'
I am very sure that the Sultan referred to "kerajaan",as they usually do. I must remind you that there is a conspiracy of spin doctors out there to mislead us for their own agenda. I still have due respect for our royalty and I also suspect that there are elements out there who will drag them into political scenarios to meet their own ends. These are the ruthless and power crazy animals in our midst. I pray, as I am sure you do, to see our royalty remain apolitical.

muzikri said...

should remain apolitical.......

muzikri said...

intellectual studies regarding our old manuscripts of bustan al salatin,hikayat raja melayu should be done to show the consequences for these types of manners.........raja adil,raja disembah......raja zalim, raja disanggah.......just wan to share......thanks.....

Mike said...

Yes Rama,
The Sultan was reading the text of his speech written by some tout in the Pahang MB's office. He fell into a trap. This is the result of lazyness of not reading the text carefully beforehand.
Anyway, his brother was a dep. minister who sulkily resigned in a huff coz he thought that he shud be a full minister.
Most of them are hardly educated and they know no better.
Agi Idup Agi Ngelaban.

Agi Idup Agi Ngelaban said...

Rulers -should be on the neutral side of the field and for all of his subject to honor and look up when in distress with compassion.

Should they are taking side Politically, it is obviously they are opening up themselves to the wrath of the opposing side and inviting all the unnecessary tirade that follows thereafter.

Either the mistakes of reading through a prepared text, are willfully or otherwise, but the damage had been done to the extend that it is really uncalled for in the first instances.

However, it is totally wrong for the Politician to trap the HRH Sultan by handing him a prepared text speech in the first place, knowingly well that none of the VVIP will ever bother to go through of the text before going public.

Thereby the smacked that is forthcoming after the event, will render the HRH Sultan harmless, if that is the case would be.

Hopefully it does prevail as such, or it is otherwise, then all hell will break loose beyond repair, perhaps.

komando said...

The end is nearing FOLKS...we will see more obvious cock-ups,SCREW -UPS and hiccups. So,let them do what they want and say what they want...

They are digging their own graves and it grows bigger and bigger, and better each day..

All of them will eventually fall into that big HOLE, self buried and self has been destined that way..

Royals or not, we will all have to answer for whatever said & done, no matter it is a plain mistake or out of ignorance/self stupidity/idiotic brains and all other stupid excuses!





pelangi said...


malaysia is be fare we should look back our history particularly during the struggle for independent.

most of HRH, our malay ruler were deeply involved in the struggle to free tanah melayu from the foreign occupier.

even to the extent that HRH the malay ruler had been a driving force to unite the people especially the malays in starting the independent movement.

after all this years of their crucial contribution to see their rakyat wellbeing and saveguard the country's independent, they (HRH)cannot even say anything about a political party?

if i am not wrong UMNO is ''born'' in the palace and breasfeeded by the royalties.then the HRH with open heart accepted the ''extended'' family (other political parties from various race).

if they (HRH)have some opinion about the ruling goverment of the day, does not meant that their otherside ''subjects''(rakyat) are not been loved or neglected.

just as parents who have their special 'love' on one among their childrens.just as simple as that.

the goverment of the day in state which is ruled by the opposition has not been treated differently.we can see clearly is it?

it really saddened me to read comments which carries harsh words and sometimes instigating in nature which shows that they had been 'intoxicated'by a bad doctrine.their comments broke all the laws of sedition and the constitution.

when a father make a mistake can the children take the opportunity to hurl abuses at the father? aren't they should put it 'nicely'their views,just like the malay proverb 'menarik rambut dalam tepung'.

Mike said...

To Pelangi,
Your understanding of basic Malaysian history is as bad as your English. Which planet are you from?
* Have you read the events leading to the Pangkor Treaty on 20th January 1874 where Perak was sold for b'fast by our greedy royalty?*
* Have you read of the MacMicheal Treaties and the Malayan Union where our royal nearly sold our country to the Brit Colonials?^
Had it not been for Datuk Onn Jaafar we would have been slaves. Tunku Abd Rahman saved our Royalty or we would have been a republic.
Please read:
*1. Cowan C.D. " Nineteenth Century Malaya, The Origins of British Political Control." Oxford Uni Press, 1962, pp 182-211.
^2. Gordon P Means, " Malaysian Politics." Uni of London Press Ltd, 1970 pp 51-57.
I am quite taken aback. You are a baffling ignoramus!!

FMZam said...

Hello mr pelangi,

Just what kind of history was that you are telling us it sounds more like your own kind of history of your own Fantasyland you thought you could fool us with that?

Please la, don't think that this blog is like a remote jungle that you can "auta" us all with you brand of history and claim that it our history.

OMG! Are we still having this kind of human on earth?

And don't start using the word sedition when in the first place who are that the one so intoxicating?

FMZam said...

For a king to live in all luxuries and all his lifelong has forgotten his people in his time of the better only to remember his people in his time of dire, his call for the people's support is deemed as his distress call to save his skin more than saving the skins of his people.

All these while the people have never been saved by a king, we save ourselves and in the way we save our king. And we always say out loud in our song "God save the king" and in every Friday we never miss to pray to Allah to "save our king".

Can't the king now pray to Allah to save the people instead of asking Allah and the people to save the king?