http://dapmalaysia.org  

As government has admitted that the national anthem has lost the “essence of national identity” with the change to marching rhythm in 1992, the original Negaraku should be played on National Day on August 31 instead of experimenting with a third version without seeking a national consensus first Media Statement by Lim Kit Siang (Penang,  Thursday): The Star today reported that the 46-year-old national anthem, Negaraku, which was given an upbeat marching rhythm 11 years ago, “will go back to its stately original tempo, albeit marginally faster”. It quoted “a high-ranking Information Ministry source” as saying: “It will still be the same Negaraku that we grew up with except that it will be slightly faster than the original one.  “The 1957 arrangement captured the essence of our national identity but after it was changed to a marching rhythm in 1992, this essence was lost.  It appears to have failed to invoke that patriotic passion.” In the third version of the national anthem,  the lyric ‘Negaraku’ will be replaced by ‘Malaysiaku’ although the rest of the lyrics remained the same.  As the government has admitted that the national anthem has lost the “essence of national identity” with the change to marching rhythm in 1992, the original Negaraku should be played on National Day on August 31 instead of experimenting with a third version without first having a national consultation and consensus.  DAP Member of Parliament for Batu Gajah Fong Poh Kuan has informed me that the 8 pm TV3 news in Bahasa Malaysia last night sought the  response from the public by SMS  to two positions as to   whether the Negaraku should be changed after playing part of the national anthem, namely: (A) . Wajar, mengikut peredaran masa (B). Tidak wajar, ia adalah nostalgia. This is a most flippant, friovolous and irresponsible way of dealing with a serious and important issue, and it clearly does not qualify to  constitute any meaningful or proper  public consultation or participation.  Firstly, the two positions offered are highly loaded and unfair, giving the  impression that those who support change of the national anthem (whatever the change) are progressive people who keep abreast with the times while those who oppose change are just “nostalgic”, conservative and behind-times.  Secondly, there is no genuine attempt to seek the informed  opinion and choice of the people as the new  third version of the national anthem after re-arrangement and a new  music score have not been played for the public to make a judgment.  If  the TV3 item is the government’s attempt to seek public opinion and input on  a third version of the national anthem in 46 years, it is a most flippant, undignified,  irresponsible and unprofessional  way to conduct  public consultation on a serious national issue.  The reason the third version of the national anthem could not be played to let the  people decide whether it is better to accept the new variation or  to return to the original 1957  national anthem is simply  because the new musical arrangements have not been finalized yet.  According to the “Information Ministry source”, four composers, including from the army and police force orchestras, had submitted their variations of the arrangements, and that the new version of the national anthem would make its official debut on the National Day on August 31.  This is a completely wrong way of addressing the question as to whether a national anthem of  a democratic society  should be altered, as it should be the product of a national consultation process lasting from three to six months and not be sprung as a surprise on the nation on National Day as if it is some sort of a “National Day present” – to be judged a decade later as a failure in having lost the “essence of national identity” as is now the case with the 1992 re-arrangement.   DAP reiterates that any decision to introduce a third version of the national anthem on the 46th National Day on August 31 should be scrapped  until a proper national consultation process could be conducted as to whether there should be any change, and in the meantime, the original 46-year-old national anthem should be  restored and played on the forthcoming National Day.  The Cabinet should give the DAP proposal  serious consideration so that  the 46th National Day  will not be remembered in the future as marking a new  national division instead of fostering greater  national unity, dividing Malaysians  between those who support the Tunku’s national anthem  from Mahathir’s national anthem. (7/8/2003) * Lim Kit Siang, DAP National Chairman