By Hinting Politicians Can Rule Country "Till Last Breath", Is PAS Sending Out A Dangerous Message…?
28 Mar 2025 • 6:00 PM MYT
JK Joseph
Repentant ex-banker who believes in truth, compassion and some humour
PAS “supremo” Haji Abdul Hadi Awang.
Credit Image: Kosmo
Recently, a DAP MP had enlightened that setting term limits for a country's leader is a safeguard against abuse of power and ensures dynamic, progressive governance; however, PAS has disputed the narrative, and has even openly questioned the merits of democracy in this country!
In a recent post in his popular Facebook account, outspoken PAS information chief Fadhli Shaari defended his party president Abdul Hadi Awang who had openly rejected the idea of limiting the country's prime minister’s tenure (to two terms); for the record, the latter had claimed that such a move will contradict God’s will!
The influential Hadi, who is also the Marang MP, stressed that throughout history, Islamic “caliphs” have served until their last breath, fulfilling their duty with unwavering commitment.
For context, the PAS president was responding to DAP secretary-general Anthony Loke who had ignited an unexpected firestorm after stating that his party will propose to the government to amend the Federal Constitution to include a two-term limit for prime ministers in this country.
Meanwhile, on allegations that Hadi's statement may be misleading and constituted a threat to the country's democratic foundations, Fadhli, the Pasir Mas MP, argued that limiting leadership terms won't necessarily guarantee good governance.
Fadhli further asserted that it is “divine will” and not democracy that should dictate leadership terms while cautioning that the latter is not flawless, and adding that it is also not immune to manipulation, corruption and self-serving interests.
But then, unlike democracy, are there any universally adopted standards to define “divine will?”
Moreover, according to him, a corrupt leader can destroy a nation in a single term while a just leader grounded in faith and moral integrity can serve for decades in the people's best interests.
Fadhli further highlighted that leadership should be measured by principles - not based on a time limit imposed in the name of democracy!
Unsurprisingly, he then trained his guns at the United States which he labelled as the “self-proclaimed champion of democracy” which purportedly restricts its presidents to only two terms in office.
Yet, according to him, its past presidents such as George Bush and Barack Obama who both served for the maximum two terms were responsible for waging endless wars and ruining nations such as Libya, Iraq and Syria.
So what's the use of a two-term limit?
Fadhli also appeared to dismiss the proposal as merely a “cosmetic enhancement” with no real impact on the people; and as such, he added, his Islamist party is not obliged to support the agenda.
He also pointed out that his party president doesn't reject democracy but his stance is that democracy alone is not enough; furthermore, according to him, without a moral compass, democracy is just a numbers game where power doesn't belong to the people - but to the elites who control the nation’s narrative.
Does that mean democracy is devoid of moral values…?
In signing off, Fadhli stressed that the true test of leadership shouldn't be gauged in terms of duration in office but in the person's “righteousness”, and that no ballot box can determine that!
However, the PAS leader’s argument is bound to spark a heated debate in the country and raise serious concerns over his party's controversial views.
Incidentally, while Fadhli had cited past US presidents as an example to support his claim that democracy is not flawless and that limiting the leader's tenure is not much of an antidote, critics may ask: what about leaders from the Arab world such as Syria's authoritarian president Bashar al-Assad who ruled over a civil war-ravaged country for 24 years?
Then there was the notorious former president of Uganda Idi Amin who was known for his brutality and where some 300,000 of his people were said to have been killed during his vicious regime?
Didn't those two leaders who served “without any term limits” end up devastating their own country? Were they both “divinely” appointed? Were they guided by any moral compass?
Interestingly, Hadi had also reminded that Islamic “caliphs” had served until their last breath; but doesn't that point to a disconnect with the reality in this multiracial and multi-religious country? Unless of course, his party is bent on rewriting the Constitution and turning it into a theocracy… or a caliphate? Is this their underlying message to the people?
Maybe PAS has been quietly strategizing and is confident of forming the next federal government…?
Furthermore, by opposing the proposed two-term limit, what if current premier Anwar Ibrahim was to secure a second term in office after GE16? Will they deem it as “God's will” and cheer him on to serve permanently?
Or is PAS’ “serve until the last breath” ruling only applicable for a candidate from its own party? In other words, does it mean that, if ever the Islamist party ruled this country, it will be for perpetuity – as per “divine will?”
So what's the endgame…?
In closing, critics may claim that aside from it's political rivalry with DAP, the Islamist party’s opposition to the proposal and its broadside against democracy could yet be another manifestation of its true agenda; but more ominously, wouldn't it also be interpreted as a dangerous attack on the country’s very Constitution that has helped to keep this country intact for generations?
Recently, a DAP MP had enlightened that setting term limits for a country's leader is a safeguard against abuse of power and ensures dynamic, progressive governance; however, PAS has disputed the narrative, and has even openly questioned the merits of democracy in this country!
In a recent post in his popular Facebook account, outspoken PAS information chief Fadhli Shaari defended his party president Abdul Hadi Awang who had openly rejected the idea of limiting the country's prime minister’s tenure (to two terms); for the record, the latter had claimed that such a move will contradict God’s will!
The influential Hadi, who is also the Marang MP, stressed that throughout history, Islamic “caliphs” have served until their last breath, fulfilling their duty with unwavering commitment.
For context, the PAS president was responding to DAP secretary-general Anthony Loke who had ignited an unexpected firestorm after stating that his party will propose to the government to amend the Federal Constitution to include a two-term limit for prime ministers in this country.
Meanwhile, on allegations that Hadi's statement may be misleading and constituted a threat to the country's democratic foundations, Fadhli, the Pasir Mas MP, argued that limiting leadership terms won't necessarily guarantee good governance.
Fadhli further asserted that it is “divine will” and not democracy that should dictate leadership terms while cautioning that the latter is not flawless, and adding that it is also not immune to manipulation, corruption and self-serving interests.
But then, unlike democracy, are there any universally adopted standards to define “divine will?”
Moreover, according to him, a corrupt leader can destroy a nation in a single term while a just leader grounded in faith and moral integrity can serve for decades in the people's best interests.
Fadhli further highlighted that leadership should be measured by principles - not based on a time limit imposed in the name of democracy!
Unsurprisingly, he then trained his guns at the United States which he labelled as the “self-proclaimed champion of democracy” which purportedly restricts its presidents to only two terms in office.
Yet, according to him, its past presidents such as George Bush and Barack Obama who both served for the maximum two terms were responsible for waging endless wars and ruining nations such as Libya, Iraq and Syria.
So what's the use of a two-term limit?
Fadhli also appeared to dismiss the proposal as merely a “cosmetic enhancement” with no real impact on the people; and as such, he added, his Islamist party is not obliged to support the agenda.
He also pointed out that his party president doesn't reject democracy but his stance is that democracy alone is not enough; furthermore, according to him, without a moral compass, democracy is just a numbers game where power doesn't belong to the people - but to the elites who control the nation’s narrative.
Does that mean democracy is devoid of moral values…?
In signing off, Fadhli stressed that the true test of leadership shouldn't be gauged in terms of duration in office but in the person's “righteousness”, and that no ballot box can determine that!
However, the PAS leader’s argument is bound to spark a heated debate in the country and raise serious concerns over his party's controversial views.
Incidentally, while Fadhli had cited past US presidents as an example to support his claim that democracy is not flawless and that limiting the leader's tenure is not much of an antidote, critics may ask: what about leaders from the Arab world such as Syria's authoritarian president Bashar al-Assad who ruled over a civil war-ravaged country for 24 years?
Then there was the notorious former president of Uganda Idi Amin who was known for his brutality and where some 300,000 of his people were said to have been killed during his vicious regime?
Didn't those two leaders who served “without any term limits” end up devastating their own country? Were they both “divinely” appointed? Were they guided by any moral compass?
Interestingly, Hadi had also reminded that Islamic “caliphs” had served until their last breath; but doesn't that point to a disconnect with the reality in this multiracial and multi-religious country? Unless of course, his party is bent on rewriting the Constitution and turning it into a theocracy… or a caliphate? Is this their underlying message to the people?
Maybe PAS has been quietly strategizing and is confident of forming the next federal government…?
Furthermore, by opposing the proposed two-term limit, what if current premier Anwar Ibrahim was to secure a second term in office after GE16? Will they deem it as “God's will” and cheer him on to serve permanently?
Or is PAS’ “serve until the last breath” ruling only applicable for a candidate from its own party? In other words, does it mean that, if ever the Islamist party ruled this country, it will be for perpetuity – as per “divine will?”
So what's the endgame…?
In closing, critics may claim that aside from it's political rivalry with DAP, the Islamist party’s opposition to the proposal and its broadside against democracy could yet be another manifestation of its true agenda; but more ominously, wouldn't it also be interpreted as a dangerous attack on the country’s very Constitution that has helped to keep this country intact for generations?
It is Allah's will..
ReplyDeleteseriously who buys into what this senile old man has to say, gibberish mostly, target audience the simple folks and supporters of pas, they are the ones who will nod and agree in tandem, he should rule pas forever, that was his whole intention
ReplyDelete