KUALA LUMPUR: Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and his predecessors, including his late father, would also be guilty based on Perkasa's standards on sedition, said Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah Anwar.
The PKR leader made the remark when speaking to reporters this afternoon after being grilled by the police over an article she wrote which Malay right wing movement Perkasa deemed seditious.
Perkasa filed a police report against her because the article purportedly questioned the special position of the Malays, which Nurul denied.
The daughter of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim said that Najib's father and second prime minister Tun Abdul Razak ensured that the NEP policies were only temporary and set a 20-year limit.
“Wouldn’t this term limit be in contradiction with Perkasa’s claim of the NEP policy's permanency?” she asked.
Najib, she said, understood the spirit of his father's legacy and was implementing need-based affirmative action in his New Economic Model brainchild.
This, she noted, was a modification of the original NEP and included the liberalisation of several economic sub-sectors.
“Wouldn't this be in opposition to Perkasa's Article 153 argument for economic non-liberalisation?' she asked.
Dr M called NEP a 'temporary crutch'
As for Najib's mentor and former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Nurul said the latter realised the advantages of meritocracy and modified the public univerity admission policy.
She pointed out that in April this year, Mahathir, who is one of Perkasa's biggest supporters, publicly declared that the NEP was a “temporary crutch” for the Malays.
“Wouldn't this be considered as questioning Perkasa's Article 153 interpretation?” she asked.
Nurul also noted that former deputy premier Tun Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman once said that Malays must judge when the special position was no longer needed and described the privilege as a “slur on their abilities”.
“Wouldn't this amount to slurring Perkasa's Article 153 objectives?” she asked.
“If we use Perkasa's standards on sedition, then wouldn't these leaders be as guilty as I am? In my case, guilty for seeking clarification and in their case, of actually changing and modifying the affirmative action policy which is the essence of Artile 153,” she added.
Nurul stessed that she would stand by her views expressed in the article and wanted the people to judge her on this matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment