To be brutally honest with you, I tend to think of the Indira Gandhi saga more as a case of a marriage gone wrong than as a case of constitutional crisis or a test of religious freedom in the country.
At its root, I see the Indira Gandhi issue is about a husband and wife whose relationship turned so toxic that, rather than pursue success and happiness together or separately, both have are dedicating their lives to making their former spouse lose and suffer.
In their effort to cause maximum misery to each other, these two individuals have escalated their conflict to the point that it is now testing everything — from our race and religious relations to our Constitution, and even the powers of our courts and institutions.
To be honest, I don’t think that the problem between Indira Gandhi and her husband is an indication of state or religious persecution in Malaysia — any more than the border dispute between Cambodia and Thailand is a sign that both countries have an intractable problem between them.
Borders are always problematic. Malaysia, for example, has border issues with almost all our neighbours, even if our overall relationships with them are excellent.
Even on a personal scale, you might have some level of dissatisfaction with your neighbours at the border, over a fence or a tree perhaps, at some point or another, even if your relationship with them is otherwise excellent.
In the same way, I think that the problem that has surfaced due to the Indira Gandhi issue is actually a “border problem” — in the sense that it occurred because one party in the marriage dispute belonged to the non-Muslim group, while the other converted to become a part of the Muslim group.
I would even go so far as to argue that the fact both parties, who originally belonged to the non-Muslim group, ended up becoming part of two different groups, has more to do with their desire to escalate their marriage dispute by other means than we are caring to admit.
As a rule, however, I don’t think that this sort of “border dispute” between this estranged couple is an indication that the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims in Malaysia as a whole is unmanageable or toxic.
The dispute between Indira Gandhi and her husband, in other words — to me at least — is not caused by the bad relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims in the country. Instead, it is itself a cause for the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims to deteriorate.
As with most border disputes, whether national or individual, I don’t think there is a clear solution to the problem. Disputes that occur on a subject where both parties have a right — because the issue lies at the border of their rights — can only really be resolved when they don’t arise in the first place. Once they do arise, there usually is no effective solution.
In the same way, I don’t think the problem between Indira Gandhi and her ex-husband will ever truly find resolution. I personally am strongly convinced that both are likely to spend the rest of their lives not seeking happiness, but finding ways to cause grief to each other.
Given the intractability of their issue, I also strongly believe that the best thing that the rest of us can do is pull back our respective forces from this “border” conflict, so as to not escalate the issue.
We must understand that the “border conflict” between Indira and her ex-husband, is by no means a sign that our two communities’ relationship as a whole is problematic.
Cases like Indira Gandhi’s are isolated incidents that only occur rarely at the border of our relationship. Outside of that border, none of us need to worry or be suspicious that if we don’t “fix” Indira Gandhi’s problem, the problem will somehow spread and affect us all.
The truth is that if we don’t make it worse, even if the problem is never resolved, it will not grow to affect us all either.
Like the Batu Puteh problem between Malaysia and Singapore, or the unrest in southern Thailand near the Malaysian border, these problems will remain contained in their “border areas.” They will only escalate and affect all of us, if we pay so much attention to them, to the point that we start sending our forces to the border area.
Recently, a new issue has cropped up where Indira Gandhi’s ex-husband’s name surfaced in connection with government aid programmes such as the Sumbangan Asas Rahmah (SARA) RM100 and Budi95 fuel subsidy schemes.
Her ex-husband, K. Pathmanathan, now known as Muhammad Riduan Abdullah, was accused of abducting their 11-month-old daughter, Prasana Diksa, 17 years ago.
The revelation that Riduan is still believed to be living in Malaysia — and not in Thailand, as the police had long claimed — has led Indira to accuse the authorities of dishonesty and deliberate inaction.
She questioned how her ex-husband could have benefited from the aid programmes, which are only open to Malaysian residents, if he was supposedly abroad.
Even former Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat remarked last year that she could not understand why the police have still not located and returned the child to her mother, saying there was “no strong obstacle” to doing so.
Adding to the controversy, the Indira Gandhi Action Team (INGAT) — which has been helping Indira locate her daughter — has since raised its bounty for information on Riduan’s arrest from RM10,000 to RM50,000, following evidence that he may have withdrawn his EPF savings, renewed his car road tax, paid fines, attended public events, and enjoyed government subsidies under his real name.
INGAT also suspects that Riduan may be receiving direct or indirect support from certain extremist religious groups or state religious institutions — and that the authorities have failed to act despite multiple court orders.
If these reports are true, then Riduan is not some phantom fugitive hiding across the border, but a man living openly within Malaysia’s borders — “buying groceries, attending school functions, and refuelling his car,” as Focus Malaysia put it.
.If the police were to arrest Indira Gandhi’s husband and return the daughter to her custody, I don’t see how that would resolve anything. On the contrary, I suspect it would only escalate the issue further, turning a personal tragedy into a national crisis.
For as long as her ex-husband remains missing, we are bound to see Indira suffer.
But if her ex-husband is found, then it will be her ex-husband that will have to see suffer.
Regardless of whether he is found or not, in other words, either one of these two estranged husband and wife will suffer, and cause either the non-Muslims or Muslims in the country feel like they have to do something to address their suffering,
As strange as it sounds, I almost hope that her ex-husband is never found — even if he is hiding in plain sight — because as long as he remains “missing,” this remains a private border dispute between a former husband and wife, confined to their personal story.
But if he is found, then their problem risks becoming a full-blown national, constitutional, and judicial crisis — one that could engulf the entire nation.
TheRealNehruism (nehru.sathiamoorthy@gmail.com) is a content creator under the Newswav Creator programme, where you get to express yourself, be a citizen journalist, and at the same time monetize your content & reach millions of users on Newswav. Log in to creator.newswav.com and become a Newswav Creator now!
The User Content (as defined on Newswav Terms of Use) above including the views expressed and media (pictures, videos, citations etc) were submitted & posted by the author. Newswav is solely an aggregation platform that hosts the User Content. If you have any questions about the content, copyright or other issues of the work, please contact creator@newswav.com.
