DAULAT TUANKU Our Malay Rulers have wider executive powers, as provided by their respective constitutions, including the Federal constitution compared to other constitutional monarchs elsewhere - with the possible exception of Thailands. This anomaly places the Malay Rulers in an odd dimension where they are expected to play a more visible role in the areas that they retain executive power, namely in the administration of Islam and Malay customs. With executive power, comes accountability and with accountability comes transparency. However, executive accountability is incompatible with the established principles of constitutional monarchy. The Queen of England is never held responsible for all and any executive decision of her Governmet, albeit all Government business is conducted in her name. SIr Walter Bagehot, Englands accepted authority on the English monarchy system once adviced not to let the rays of the sun to fall onto the mysterious and ancient shadows of a monarch, lest its royal mystique fade away. Our Malay Ruler has to be very careful in his conduct in so far as his management of areas that he retains executive power in - to tread most carefully with caution and propriety - so as not to distrupt the entire constitutional balance of the overall - as a unifying symbol of his state. Members of the public, especially those who are used to the rapid flow of images & information, may naturally expect Malay Rulers to respond in line and in tempo with contemporary trends - including an ever shrinking news cycle. However, it must be pointed out that it is dangerous for a monarch to dive in into controversial issues of the moment. The present King, the Sultan of Kedah, as far as I can recall, has never uttered a public world that is not delivered in a formal speech or press statement. Nevertheless, His Majesty is widely recognised as a wise Ruler. His words are communicated quietly and behind doors - as it should be. A Ruler can, however, communicated by a system of complex signals - refusal to lend his presence, of not extending his hand, turning his gaze away, are some examples. (In the old days this was done via the delivery of a kris, the delivery of a tray of food and gifts). If a Ruler does speak, he should do so as a matter of thoughtful reflection, and this is usually done in an oblique manner (not unlike Alan Greenspans Congress statements!) and after a length of time has since passed. Queen Elizabeth only famously commented on her annus horribilis a full two years after the year in question. Also, one must also take into account that with ancient institutions, the measurement of time is different. They have longer memories. They measure time with a far longer stick. As with Buckingham Palace, our istanas are conservative and are more accepting of processes of evolution rather than revolution (no pun intended). In this context, it is foolhardy for a Ruler to publicly wade into controversial issues, more so issues trending in the social media. A Monarch should not, and cannot play to the gallery. I hope the above goes some way to explain why the Rulers are not voluble in todays issues. Rizal Zaidi Zainudin Mek Yam Zerafina Idris-Parbury Auntie Wobbity Princess Zarina Zainal
Posted on: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 03:02:50 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015