DESAH debate introduces a new political culture in Sabah

The recent debate organised by a newly formed NGO DESAH (Democracy Sabah) has opened a new chapter in Sabah politics. The debate which saw DAP’s Dr Edwin Bosi squaring off with Dr Jeffrey Kitingan of STAR centred around the issue of which alternative party is the best for Sabah. Dr Jeffrey started his opening statement by promoting STAR’s struggles for Sabah. As usual, he took a jab at the Federal Government for taking away Sabah’s rights and autonomy. Dr Jeffrey also talked specifically of STAR’s plan for Sabah. Dr Edwin focused his points on DAP’s objectives and the sacrifices made by its leaders. Interestingly, both avoided criticising each other. They were also not hostile and were able to maintain decorum throughout the debate. In the second round in which both were given the chance to ask questions to each other, Dr Jeffrey once again asked DAP’s commitment in preserving the rights and autonomy of Sabah. Dr Edwin did not disappoint Dr Jeffrey as many of the questions posed to the latter were straighforward and less controversial. Dr Edwin refused to ask any questions to Dr Jeffrey showing once more that he did not want to go at loggerheads with the popular maverick politician. He said he would prefer letting the audience to ask questions later on the DAP. The most interesting part of the debate was during the questions and answers session. Many of the questions were directed to Dr Edwin from mainly STAR’s supporters. Some of the questions were targetted at DAP and its commitment to preserve the rights of Sabahans under Malaysia. Dr Edwin answered many of the questions posted to him calmly. He refused to answer some and deliberately ignored those focusing on his loyalty as a Sabahan who supports a Semenanjung-based party. Many of the participants of the debate were in their 40s, 50s, and late 60s. The audience behaved extremely well. There were no untoward incidences. What does this debate tell about Sabah politics in the future? I can see several things. DESAH’s idea of one-to-one fight is well received by some of the people. The voters are considered at the disadvantage as their leaders of choice are not selected to become candidates. Aspiring candidates are normally chosen by party leaders and not by the voters. This is prevalent in the ruling party Barisan Nasional (BN). Due to this, voters ended up being represented by leaders who are not just incompetent but are unable to voice out their constituents’ grievances effectively. DESAH mooted the debate idea to ensure that the voters can see for themselves whom among the aspiring candidates are most suitable to represent the voters in the parliament. Second, there is growing interest among Sabahans about the importance of a debate. Debate is not part of the Sabah political culture. No debates have ever been conducted in the modern Sabah political history. Politicians go to the pulpit without having their ideas challenged by their opponents or by their voters. The DESAH debate has brought about a new thinking and a new culture in Sabah politics. The willingness of DAP and STAR to participate in the debate shows that they are supportive of a debate among political leaders. Third, the number of participants at the debate is really surprising. Initially, the organiser was expecting around 100-150 people to attend. But the crowd at the inaugural DESAH debate was somewhere between 300-400 people! Some did not mind to stand up for two hours! This is really something! The presence of young, 30- and 40-something participants shows that there is growing interest in political activism in this age group. The Daily Express ran a story about the debate the next day (11 May 2012) focusing on the issues brought by each of the debater. The Borneo Post was less sympathetic saying that the debate was not a debate per se but a public forum as questions were invited from the audience. There may be different perceptions about the debate but the fact remains that elected politicians can no longer sit comfortably and doing nothing. True, there are politicians who refuse to go to the limelight, preferring to act more than to talk. But the whole idea of a debate is not to talk alone; it is about providing the platform for elected leaders to propose, defend, and talk about issues affecting the voters. Voters now want to know how good their leaders are at articulating issues of public interests and what they are going to do to address them. Politicians who say that debates are a waste of time have missed the point and are only making excuses so that they can escape from public scrutiny.