The writer with Fahmi. Truth be told, he says he has never found the satirist to be as controversial as his reputation.
LEADING up to the 2023 state elections, my organisation had the pleasure of hosting satirist Fahmi Reza for a political education talk as part of his Democracy Class series. We knew full well the risks we were taking, given his previous numerous run-ins with the police. He came decked in his signature beret and sunglasses, we exchanged a few words, then he launched into his lecture, which was entertaining and informative.
I have never found him to be as controversial as his reputation, truth be told. A quick look at his Instagram shows that no one is spared from being used as material and they are often based on factual news developments. His latest subject, however, seemed to have earned him a date with the police yet again.
Just a week before, Fahmi was banned from TikTok permanently while livestreaming a lecture he was delivering at Universiti Malaya on student activism, particularly on how students struggled against the authorities for their rights.
The satirist is not the only person feeling disgruntled at the seeming acceptance of corruption as the norm in Sabah. Students from Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS) had staged a “Sabah Anti-Corruption Peaceful Rally” on Dec 31 amidst videos released by a whistleblower seemingly indicating rampant bribery within the state government.
I read with perplexity Gabungan Rakyat Sabah (GRS) Youth’s response to the protest and would like to highlight some choice excerpts from it, namely “corruption can be addressed through constructive dialogue”, and advising students to “refrain from participating in activities that could jeopardise their future”.
While we cannot control others’ disgruntlement, we can choose how to respond to it. The Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) could have chosen not to file a police report over the graphic. GRS Youth could have chosen to issue a more sensible statement than the one they put out.
Citizens’ right to criticise and protest is fundamental in any democracy. The criticisms made by Fahmi and the students from UMS were directed at a long- standing issue in Malaysia, which is the promotion of individuals with tainted or questionable careers, and their actions are an exercise in holding power to account.
Labelling criticism or peaceful demonstrations as threats to stability or an act that can jeopardise a student’s future is not only patronising but also dismissive of the vital role dissent plays in a healthy democracy.
Perhaps GRS Youth ought to be reminded of how student movements in Malaysia have historically played a pivotal role in shaping the nation’s political landscape, from the Baling protests in 1974 to critiquing authoritarianism in the late 1990s to 2000s.
Universities are, after all, not just institutions for academic learning but also incubators for critical thought and active citizenship. Student activism has historically highlighted injustices and brought much-needed attention to systemic issues.
Just this year, former Bangladesh prime minister Sheikh Hasina resigned and fled the country after 15 years in power following widespread protests by university students triggered by quota reforms for civil service positions.
As someone who actively championed the implementation of the Undi18 Bill which lowered our country’s voting age, I always find it ironic when political parties tell students to “pipe down”.
A study published in the International Journal of Law, Government and Communication just recently noted that “conventional political participation among youth, such as voting and attending political rallies, remains low”, citing disillusionment by perceptions of corruption and lack of appeal in mainstream politics.
The study serves as a cruel diagnosis of the issues discussed. The status quo is such that the dissemination of political education is being done by satirists like Fahmi who gets investigated when his work offends people, while students who want to speak out against corruption are told off.
For us to truly advance, there needs to be a cultural shift in how we view political dissent. Institutions like MCMC should not act as enforcers of political sensitivities but rather as protectors of open discourse.
Suppressing legitimate criticism only deepens public distrust and widens the divide between the people and those in power.
Certain components of the unity government have to demonstrate their commitment to pre-election promises and hasten revisiting laws that are weaponised against dissent, such as the Sedition Act.
On a broader level, fostering transparency and accountability must become a national priority. This includes stringent checks on appointments to key positions, ensuring that those with tainted records are not rewarded but instead held accountable.
Finally, the role of education in fostering critical thinking and civic awareness cannot be overstated.
Young Malaysians must be encouraged to ask difficult questions, challenge the status quo, and actively participate in shaping their country’s future. Empowered youth movements have the potential to become formidable agents of change, challenging systemic corruption and demanding accountability from those in power.
This new year, will we regress down the path of suppressing dissent and rewarding questionable figures, or will we embrace the hope and energy of a politically engaged youth who can rebuild trust in institutions?
The answer lies not just with the leaders but with every Malaysian willing to raise their voice and demand better.
Student Jonathan Lee traces his writing roots to The Star’s BRATs (young journalists) programme, which he has written for since 2016. He is now a Malaysian youth advocate. The views expressed here are solely his own.
