Guest Editorial: Batu Puteh - The silence of the lambs
Accountability, cabinet silence, and Batu Puteh appeal: Rethinking allegation of treachery against Mahathir
The controversy surrounding the withdrawal of the appeal to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) over Batu Puteh continues to raise important questions about the roles and responsibilities of the former cabinet ministers in Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad’s administration.
While much criticism has been leveled against Mahathir for making a unilateral decision, the silence of the Pakatan Harapan (PH) ministers at the time must also be scrutinized.
If the decision to withdraw the appeal was indeed mentioned in a cabinet meeting, it is puzzling why key ministers, including the then Deputy Prime Minister Wan Azizah, Transport Minister Anthony Loke, and Defence Minister Mohamad Sabu, chose not to voice objections or seek explanations.
Their subsequent claims of not being consulted ring hollow. Were their voices silenced by fear, political expediency, or an unwillingness to confront Mahathir?
Even if the decision appeared to be a fait accompli, a responsible cabinet would have raised questions about its rationale, particularly the reasoning behind withdrawing an appeal on grounds of cost and the perceived lack of chances for success.
The failure to engage in meaningful discourse on such a critical national issue reflects poorly on the ministers, who now seek to distance themselves from the decision.
Accusing Mahathir of treachery without holding these ministers accountable seems disingenuous.
Treachery is a grave charge that cannot be used lightly or as a tool for political vendettas.
If Mahathir is to be held responsible for the decision, the former ministers who stayed silent must also bear the weight of collective responsibility.
The RCI report, even with its omissions, is unlikely to provide a strong enough foundation for prosecuting Mahathir for treason.
It is worth remembering that arguments both for and against the appeal’s withdrawal—whether citing poor chances of success or new information warranting a renewed challenge—are speculative.
Rather than focusing on divisive allegations, it might be more productive for the government to explore broader avenues for addressing historical grievances, such as pursuing claims against the British government for historical losses, including Temasek, Batu Puteh, and the four southern Malay Muslim states ceded in 1909.
Ultimately, the episode underscores the political nature of decision-making and the propensity of politicians to prioritize survival over principles.
The silence of the former ministers and their later attempts to absolve themselves illustrate this troubling tendency.
While Mahathir’s decision might warrant criticism, labeling it treachery is a step too far, especially when those in the cabinet failed to fulfill their duty to speak up.
Prof. Dr. P Ramasamy
Malaysian, 75 years of age. Former professor of political economy UKM. Former Senior Research Fellow, ISEAS. Former Visiting Professor, University Kassel, Germany. Deputy Chief Minister Penang, 2008-2023. Former member of parliament, 2008-2013. Three terms Perai state assemblyman. Former Chairman of Penang Hindu Endowments Board. Involved in peace talks in Aceh and Sri Lanka.International peace consultant. Chairman of political party Urimai.
Subscribe Below:
This is nothing more nothing less than a wanton demonstration of ignorance for the sake of trying to cover up a general culture of incompetence led by Malaysia's lawyers and 'academics'. Okay so they know so much to be able to point fingers. Now lets see them argue the case for an appeal on the basis of the law and facts.
Lets also see how far they can go with this tirade of inutile comments about Mahathir and others and the Batu Putih case itself on the basis of the merits of the case as if they were arguing before the courts.
Lets see if they understand the constitutional conventions that protect parlaimentarians in the execution of their duties. Lets see if they in fact understand the constitution at all. 99% of Malaysia's so called constitutional experts are ignorant and merely rote learners who've never gone past their pass grades at university. No depth, no dimension, no imagination.
It is a former judge opf the Malaysian courts, an ambassador to Europe and a lawyer before and after that who instructed the learned counsel in the matteer on behalf of the Malaysian government. Lets now be precious about this matter and lay blame other than where it ought to lie. A failure through incompetent lawyers missing out on factual and legal issues.