DO you believe in human intent and the action ability of humans?  It is that human ability and moral authority to assume full responsibility and accountability for both; individual actions (including inactions), especially in caring stewardship for younger ones!

My concern and public policy anger with our religious school administration and “their private discipline culture” in the public spaces of life is the reason I wrote a column entitled: Who killed Thaqif? 

Such school authorities, regardless of their particular faith orientation, must be held fully responsible and accountable for the deaths of these youngsters at that Religious School.  The dignity and destiny of these younger Malaysian has now been completely denied, as I argued in the previous column.

Moral authority and responsibility

Allow me to introduce some clear but simple concepts for our consideration: public face and private space.  Public space is all space shared by all members of any public group. Private space is personal space of any human being or even any group; whether in a public membership group or a private membership one. Face is one’s personal experience and sense of dignity in either public or private spaces.

If we juxtapose these two concepts into a four by four matrix; we get a four quadrant map of both concepts of public and private space, and personal and group spaces. Remember that earlier I defined group as either public or private groups.

Therefore, what then is moral accountability and responsibility for all public spaces in our model of Parliamentary Democracy?  This column is therefore a follow-up to my “Who killed Thaqif?” one.

Actually, when I did an internet search, I also found out that a few others have also written sequels to the same set of questions and issues.  These included Lim Kit Siang and Commander Thayaparan.  Find the LKS one here too, as he answered my question well: We all did, was his answer! 

All public space (and private personal space as defined by Universal Human Rights principles) is legal space within which any system of Local Governance is defined in all localities.  Private Face is what I have called any human experience which declare one’s personal sense of dignity (or indignity) and destiny.

Any such sense of dignity and destiny is always defined by one’s worldviews.  In any culture or within any defined worldview, that sense of dignity and destiny is clearly framed by one’s worldview. Worldviews are assumptions we make about the world; both in the here and now, and in the thereafter.

Whose accountability and responsibility for deaths?

Public space morality and private space responsibility are closely intertwined.  In Malaysia, as part and parcel of our system of jurisprudence, the Federal Constitution is defined and promoted by our system of laws which we call rule of law.  The FC clearly states that Islam is a matter of and for State Administration.

There are nine states with Malay Rulers, as heads of state, who are explicitly defined as the core responsibility and accountability system for the faith within Islam.  Their highest level or responsibility and accountability are the Conference of Rulers.

My six questions from the earlier column remain unanswered by anybody at the state administration level, and now, we have another 23 dead bodies. Why do we play political football with this issue of personal faith and concern. Let me therefore raise my constitutional concern from a public policy perspective.

The 23 dead bodies include a former colleague’s family and one relative.  Therefore, my anger is now even more compassionate with a very personal sense of empathy and pain, especially since such issues of fire are real and happens everywhere and anywhere.

My public policy questions for the idiocratic Cabinet of the Government of Malaysia is as follows:

- Is not education a federal matter? If religion is a state matter and the Islamic religious authorities want to educate younger people with a faith-based worldview, does it mean they do not follow principles such a rule of law and system of governance?

- Is not the Ministry of Education now charged with all primary and national level education?  So, are these religious schools “operated under current Ministry of Education rules?”  If not, can someone explain why not?

- If a state religious authority runs these schools; are they also privately run and funded schools?  How then are they administered?  Who is responsible for their management in public space?  Cannot criminal action be taken by Police if there is in fact criminal misdemeanour as a result of poor administration?

This problem of public space and face is never going to simply go away.  Therefore, as a public policy person, I raise this as an issue needing serious resolution.  Come on dear Cabinet; as the Chief Executive of the nation-state, whither governance? – September 25, 2017.

* KJ John worked in public service for 32 years, retired, and started a civil group for which he is chairman of the board. He writes to inform and educate, arguing for integration with integrity in Malaysia. He believes such a transformation has to start with the mind before it sinks into the heart!

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.