Can the jailing of Anwar save Malaysia’s democracy?

The jailing of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim last week for sodomy following a seven-year court battle marks the end of an incredible chapter in the annals of Malaysian politics and the simultaneous beginning of a new one that could potentially change the course of democracy in the country.

It is telling that the verdict of the Federal Court on Tuesday that ended Anwar’s career as opposition leader and MP of the Permatang Pauh constituency made headlines all around the world. It wouldn’t have been news if it were just a story about a sodomite.

Whoever inherits the improbable role of consolidating a possible alternative to the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition will surely need to demonstrate uncommon political astuteness, leadership and perhaps, will need a generous dose of luck as well.

But beyond the practical question of Anwar’s political successor, there are deep misgivings about the notions of justice, integrity, truth and decency surrounding the extraordinary trial that go to the core of ourselves as individuals and our collective national response as witnesses to the unmaking of the law. Issues like these have been the focus of a flood of statements from a range of opinion leaders inside and outside the country following the apex court’s decision.

Further in the distance, there lies a raft of fundamental issues that are crying for attention. These range from the foundations of Malaysia’s democracy, such as the separation of powers and the role of citizens in ensuring the accountability of public institutions to the reformation of the larger democratic process. Moreover, even basic ideas about universal human rights in a political system that is seriously impaired are clamouring to be acknowledged.

It is unlikely that these questions will be adequately addressed in the immediate term despite the pressing nature of the issues surrounding them. For now, much energy will be focused on the emotional responses to the finality of Anwar’s political fate, the circumstances under which he lost his freedom and what the epic episode reveals about the people involved in the case.

This is to be expected, as it is only natural that the glaring discrepancies in the case, as the Bar Council noted following the announcement of the verdict, would create the troubling idea that a political persecution has taken place.

Consequently, it becomes relevant to ask whether the legal system is acting in line with the norms of natural justice, and if not, how it can be brought into alignment with this fundamental purpose of the law.

What, we will need to know, must the people do to ensure that the guardians of the law do not stray from this high ideal, and where justice has not been done, what remedies are available to restore integrity to the system.

The answer to such questions require much soul-searching, which can only arise when we take ownership of the issue and begin to invest precious time in contemplating our duties as citizens and become willing to participate in the public life of the state.

Put another way, justice comes under risk when we do not step up to point out the errors of people in public office who misuse the powers vested in them for anything other than the public good. Therefore, we need to nudge ourselves a little closer to the realisation that a perversion of justice can only take place if we remain willing to tolerate it, for whatever reasons we think can extenuate our non-involvement.

And when we become convinced of the opposite, that is, that we cannot afford to stand aside and allow a wrong to go unchallenged, whether it is perpetrated on others or ourselves, then we tend to find that the old reasons that fed our inertia are totally lacking in merit.

Our entire perspective becomes miraculously transformed.

At this time, therefore, the real issue that needs to be addressed is not whether Anwar is guilty as charged, but rather that a serious rot has set into the country’s democratic institutions and threatens to lay the country low unless we can find the motivation to stop their further degradation.

So, when the outrage over the case flows towards the circumstances that permitted it to thwart the democratic will of the people, we will be one step closer to redeeming our country’s future.

When that happens, particular heed will be paid to the structural and systemic issues affecting the state of governance in the country that can lead to a politically significant person being neutralised.

At the top of a well-worn list of wrongs that undermine the rule of law in the country is the absolute power that is vested in the attorney-general to charge anyone, posing a significant risk of selective prosecution.

Alongside this are twin stumbling blocks that prevent the judiciary from effectively exercising its constitutional powers as a check-and-balance to the executive arm of government and that prevent Parliament from playing that role as well.

The first stumbling block is the Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2009, which empowers the prime minister to revoke the appointment of any member of the commission at any time without giving any reason for his decision, and the prime minister’s right to ask for additional candidates for judicial positions besides the persons selected by the commission.

The second obstacle is the non-functioning of Parliament as a countervailing force to the executive and judiciary in terms of vetoing government decisions that do not pass the time-tested criteria of transparency, accountability and integrity as well as judicial appointments that may leave room for questions about potential conflict of interest, independence or ethical conduct, among other things.

These ponderous issues are among a slew of concerns that reform-minded groups have raised for the longest time to argue for the need for a democratic transformation. They need to gain traction among a critical mass of the people for progress to be made towards meaningful change.

Whether the incarceration of Anwar could eventually provide the catalyst for the overhaul of Malaysia’s democratic institutions remains an open question. However, many would agree that it is an idea whose time has come. – February 14, 2015.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider.