THE recent police report by PERKASA (Pertubuhan Pribumi Perkasa Malaysia) over media coverage linking Sultan Ibrahim King of Malaysia to a shareholding in U Mobile Sdn Bhd which was recently appointed as the country’s second 5G network operator has raised eyebrows – and troubling questions.
PERKASA, led by its president Syed Hasan Syed Ali, claimed this action was intended to protect the image of the monarchy which it argued could be tarnished by unverified reports associating the Yang di-Pertuan Agong with the telecommunications company.
However, the move itself brings forth several puzzling elements that are worth unpacking.
To begin with, PERKASA’s decision to lodge a police report over what could have been clarified through a simple search with the Companies Commission of Malaysia (SSM) seems unusual.
A basic check costs only RM15 and could be done online in a matter of minutes. Why go through all the trouble of lodging a police report?
This raises the next question: Was there an expectation that getting the cops involved might trigger something beyond the simple act of fact-checking?
Syed Hasan was quoted in the media as saying after lodging the police report that Article 34(3) of the Federal Constitution restricts the Agong from actively participating in any commercial enterprise. Why did he have to say this? What were his motivations?
Any ulterior motive?
Does he have ulterior motives to draw the attention of the Royal Malaysia Police (PDRM) to other issues? Was it necessary to make a hue and cry over something that could have been sorted out quietly?
It is also worth recalling that PERKASA has historical ties to twice former premier Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad who has not shied away from expressing his views on the role of the monarchy in Malaysia.
The ties blossomed during the tenure of its past president Datuk Ibrahim Ali, a former UMNO stalwart. Like Dr Mahathir’s stance, PERKASA too, is a far-right Malay outfit.
Dr Mahathir’s relationship with the royal institution has often been frosty at best and confrontational at its worst. Could this report – rather than being a gesture of loyalty – be part of a more complex, calculated play?
Is the police report aimed at heightening public speculation and scrutiny over the Agong’s supposed business ties?
Statements like Syed Hasan claiming that “the people are a bit confused as to whether this news is true or false” amplify the matter in a way that might ironically achieve the opposite effect of what PERKASA ostensibly intends.
The monarchy holds a unique and esteemed position in Malaysia’s governance structure. For many, questioning this institution – even inadvertently – would be considered stepping into sensitive territory which could possibly entail 3R (race, religion, royalty) breaches.
In this context, PERKASA’s insistence on a police probe over a straightforward SSM search raises troubling questions.
As this story unfolds, it will be worth observing whether this police report achieves PERKASA’s stated aim of defending the monarchy or if it leaves a lingering perception that it may do quite the opposite. – Nov 7, 2024
Main image credit: Editor Malaysia.com
