Amalan Autokrasi Dalam PAS

Nak percaya pun susah... Tak nak percaya pun tak boleh juga sebab ada pendedahan. Nak marah pun ada... Geram dah tentu. Kecewa sudah pasti... Inilah yang aku rasakan bila mendapat tahu rupanya dalam PAS pun ada wujud amalan autokrasi (kuku besi).

Kalau aku jadi AJK PAS Pusat pun akan kecewa dan terkilan. Mana boleh tak kecewa jika terpaksa menulis terlebih dahulu 12 perenggan hanya semata-mata untuk mendapatkan kebenaran 'buka mulut' menyuarakan pandangan. Juga merupakan satu risiko bagi setiap AJK PAS Pusat yang cuba mengkritik dan menentang pandangan top leader dalam parti.

Bahasa mudahnya "Siapa yang mengkritik dan tidak bersetuju dengan Presiden dikira "tidak wala". Macam menderhaka jugalah...

Rupanya wujud amalan tidak boleh mengkritik dan menentang sebarang keputusan dan idea yang dibuat oleh 'top leader' dalam PAS. Di mana letaknya kebebasan bersuara yang sering dilaungkan oleh pimpinan utama PAS selama ini ? Tidak dinamakan "autocracy" lagikah jika pimpinan bawahan terpaksa memerah otak nak menulis 12 perenggan bagi mendapatkan kelulusan (justify) untuk buka mulut mengeluarkan pandangan. Itu pun kalau lulus. Kalau tak, duduk diam je dalam meeting. Lepas tu angguk saja dengan setiap keputusan dan pandangan bos.

Jika ada di kalangan pimpinan bawahan yang menentang sebarang cadangan dan idea pihak atasan, maka mereka akan dicop sebagai "tidak wala". Inilah modal yang digunakan oleh mana-mana pimpinan PAS di seluruh negara bila keputusan dan idea mereka tidak dipersetujui oleh orang bawahan.

Adalah amat malang sekali jika istilah "tidak wala" ini digunakan sewenang-wenangnya. Macamana pimpinan dan ahli bawahan nak wala' jika keputusan dan idea yang dibuat itu tidak rasional dan merugikan. Pimpinan PAS perlu sedar mereka juga manusia biasa. Bukan maksum dan ada kelemahan. Jangan sekali-kali mudah 'menghukum' pimpinan bawahan yang mengkritik atau menentang sebarang keputusan itu sebagai "tidak wala".

Kalau beginilah keadaannya, benar telahan aku bahawa memang wujud unsur 'gila kuasa' dalam PAS.

Teringat aku pada 10 Ahli Parlimen PAS yang menandatangani kenyataan bersama menentang idea Unity Government di lobi Parlimen pada bulan lalu. Yang pasti kesemua 10 MP PAS ini akan dicop sebagai 'Tidak Wala' kerana menentang idea Presiden. Tak tahulah aku apa nasib dan karier politik mereka selepas ini. Kemungkinan besar 10 orang ini tidak akan dipilih semula untuk bertanding dalam PRU13 kelak.

Nasib baiklah aku masuk PAS kerana Allah. Kalau tak, dah lama aku blah...

Berikut adalah artikel yang ditulis oleh Wan Saiful Wan Jam ;

Dear Erdogans, please don't die now

The article by Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad MP makes a very interesting read. The way he presented his ideas shows just how risky it is to speak up against the top brass in PAS.

Just look at the top half of Dzulkefly’s article. Even though he is a member of PAS’ central committee, he had to write twelve paragraphs just to justify opening his mouth. It was as if in PAS, freedom of expression exists only if you can justify it.

Obey, or else…

But the most telling parts are paragraphs six and nine. In paragraph six, he said disagreeing with the party’s President is not disobedience (tidak wala’). This is a very important point to note about the culture of the party.

Those who joined PAS in the understanding that PAS is an Islamic movement, especially would know how much effort is made to implant the concept of obedience (wala’) into our heads. If one were accused of being disobedient to the leaders (tidak wala’ kepada pimpinan), one would be sidelined very quickly. Criticising the leadership in public could easily earn you the label of “tidak wala’”. For a politician in the party, it could be a career killer.

It is therefore understandable for Dzulkefly to be cautious. Just to be on the safe side, when he pens his thoughts in that article, people must know that he has a religious argument why it is not disobedient (tidak wala’).

And then in paragraph nine he went on to say that Hadi is a statesman. Hadi proposed the unity government agenda out of his great wisdom and love of the country. Dzulkefly even went on in the next few paragraphs to provide a half-hearted defence of the unity government proposal.

Dzulkefly’s praise of Hadi’s ‘statesmanship’ and his attempt to semi-justify the unity government proposition are painful to read. I don’t know if he even believes in what he wrote because the bottom half of the article more or less rubbished Hadi’s ideas and so-called ‘wisdom’.

Silencing method

I do not intend to evaluate the unity government proposition in this article. My interest is more in seeing a reformed PAS — one that celebrates diversity and competition of ideas.

The main challenge is in breaking the taboo that criticising is not the same with disobedience. I remember when I was President and then Mursyid of HIZBI, an organisation in the UK and Ireland that had very close links with PAS, inculcating obedience among our new recruits was of utmost importance.

If members have ideas, they must channel the ideas correctly. You cannot simply criticise the leaders in the public because you have a responsibility to protect their “dignity”. So, you should speak in private with the person concerned, or speak to others who can bring your ideas upwards. The key point here is, any criticism must be done in private, without exposing the weakness of the leader you criticise. The common term being used is “Kalau nak mengkritik mesti beradab”.

The leaders will then consider your objection, and, if necessary, bring it to a syura. The decision of the syura is final. If the syura decides against you, you must accept it. That is the essence of wala’ – you obey even, and especially, if you disagree.

Of course, that is an oversimplification. One can come out with pages and pages of refutation to my simplification, but the ultimate end remains – i.e.: obedience to the leader is absolute unless you can somehow prove that he is disobeying God.

The tyranny of the system is very clear. Anyone who publicly criticises the leader risks being reprimanded, and therefore all critics are more or less silenced. If you are labelled as “tidak wala”, you can rest assured that you will have difficulty to progress in the movement. And the worst would be to earn yourself the label “tidak wala’” and “tidak beradab”. If someone at Dzulkefly's position is concerned at speaking up, just imagine how difficult it is for a lay-member of PAS to raise his voice.

And, please don’t get me wrong. When I describe my experience in HIZBI, I am not doing so because I am proud of it. But as someone who at one stage propagated the very same concept, the experience does give me an understanding of the challenges to speak up in the party.

Disobedient Erdogans, or impotent Erdogans?

I can therefore understand why Dzulkefly, despite him being a member of PAS central committee, went at some length to say that his article should not be taken as a sign of disobedience. Writing that article puts him at risk of being labelled as a disobedient troublemaker in the party, not as a constructive critic.

I will not be surprised if the conservatives in PAS, through their usrah, tamrin, and ceramah, start reminding members about the importance of obedience. Rest assured that they will lace it with various Quranic verses and prophetic traditions. This is the best way to silence any PAS members, or even leaders, who dare to challenge conservative ideas.

My fear now is that the Erdogans will wilt for fear of earning the label of “tidak wala’”. The ten MPs who signed the statement protesting against the unity government have taken a very bold step to speak up. Nevertheless, the immediate response from PAS’ top brass to halt all discussions about unity government made it difficult for the Erdogans to continue their reform agenda, if they ever had one, without being seen as the enemies within. Even now the Erdogans are beginning to go quiet.

The challenge of the situation is, if the Erdogans stop speaking up now, they will be portrayed as a prime example of how disobedience splits the party. The blame will be put on them by the powers that be. The real culprits, namely the people who proposed the unity government agenda in the first place, and particularly Hadi, will be unscathed.

The Erdogans in PAS must come up with a coherent reform agenda, or they will eventually be portrayed as having quietly admitted mistake and defeat. This will make it very difficult for others in the party to speak up for decades to come. The Erdogans will eventually become the latest evidence why speaking up in public is bad and does not work for PAS.

The Erdogans may have won the unity government battle. But if they do not take this all the way, their sudden and early impotence will be the first step towards losing a war for reform in PAS.

Wan Saiful Wan Jan is Director General of the Malaysia Think Tank (www.WauBebas.org). He was President of HIZBI for more than three terms before becoming Mursyid.