MAY 20 — Malaysia was caught by surprise when Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad announced that he would be taking the education portfolio, in addition to being prime minister.

While he did joke that he chose to do so because there were "many uneducated people around”, the fact that his first Cabinet appointment in 1974 was as education minister made it seem as though he had a job to finish, or something to atone for.

So it came as a further surprise when Dr Mahathir let go of the post, following public complaints that the Pakatan Harapan (PH) manifesto pledged for the prime minister to not hold another ministerial post.

By actually acting on something quickly following a public uproar, he has already set this government apart from that of his predecessor.

But nothing may have prepared the public for Dr Mahathir naming PPBM’s first-term Simpang Renggam MP academic-turned-politician Maszlee Malik as education minister instead. The announcement was met with bitter disappointment by some in the public.

The furore towards the announcement was manifold.

Some thought that only Dr Mahathir had the gumption and political will to fix the mess that is our education system.

Some had also hoped that Saifuddin Abdullah would be appointed instead, considering his previous experience as the higher education deputy minister.

But a significant percentage of the backlash against Maszlee is due to his background in Islamic jurisprudence and political Islam; he was a lecturer at the International Islamic University — which some felt were not suitable credentials for the portfolio.

The concern is justified. Islamisation has crept into the education system, either from overt insertion of religion into secular subjects, or from the increasingly religious stance taken by the newer teachers who have been taught all their lives that butting into people’s lives is a virtue.

But to hold this against him is as distracting as judging him for being a fan of Manchester City.

Mazlee Malik’s appointment as Minister of Education was met with protest from many in the public... but the man should be given a chance. — File picture

A more problematic issue is his apparent soft stance towards televangelist Dr Zakir Naik. In 2016, as part of the Muslim Professionals Forum, Maszlee had slammed Zakir’s critics for their "evidently false and treacherous” allegations, and the media for thriving on "Islamophobic nuances” — both lamentable and debatable assertions in support of someone as vile as Zakir.

But this stance also confuses me when compared with Maszlee’s and my shared opposition to other hate-mongers such as Sunni group Aswaja’s Zamihan Mat Zin, some clerics in PAS, and the Islamist lobby such as Isma.

Even in one of our most recent chats, Maszlee had forwarded me his paper on political party Amanah published by International Institute of Advanced Islamic Studies, where he urged for inclusivity against religious hegemony and intolerance, and for universal values and ethics.

After covering him for many years and through out occasional chats, I am ready to give Maszlee at least a chance — even when I have been obviously critical towards both Zakir and his sympathisers.

I believe him to be a solid academic, knowledgeable in various different fields, but above all open to new thoughts and ideas.

Another similarly criticised post was Amanah’s Kuala Selangor MP Dzulkefly Ahmad, who was appointed health minister — another portfolio where it is important to prevent Islamisation and encroachment of religion.

The cynicism towards Dzulkefly was even more baffling. Not only does he have the credentials to hold the position with his previous experience in teaching medical science, but I also believe he has the intellectual depth for such a post.

There is a reason why he is Amanah’s strategic director. He was PAS’ Research Centre’s executive director before the purge on so-called "progressives” in the party. His thoughts on politics, economics, and various other secular issues evidently left a void of reason within the Islamist party when he left.

There are already several bothersome issues with the Cabinet announcements.

They are, after all, first and foremost, political, not technocratic appointments — an inescapable situation in Malaysian politics. Ministers are chosen for their party posts: a deputy president here, a women’s wing chief there.

There is also a more pressing issue for PH, which is its pledge to have at least 30 per cent of the Cabinet made up of women. With just around 10 ministerial posts left, PH is nowhere near the required number.

In the end, the question boils down to how comfortable you are with having Islamists in the Cabinet. Just because we did not previously have PAS in the Cabinet, does not mean there were none in Umno.

Having Amanah MPs as ministers is a given when voters have chosen to back PH. And it is an insult to credible and upright leaders such as Mohamad Sabu, Salahuddin Ayub, and Dzulkefly — and others not yet named such as Siti Mariah Mahmud, Husam Musa, Mujahid Yusof Rawa, Khalid Samad — not to be given significant roles.

Because for a federal government to succeed, it still needs to somehow address the concerns of the Malay-Muslim majority, and if there were to be a Muslim element in the Cabinet, then there is no party more suitable than Amanah.

Amanah ought to not only deliver some of that religious credibility, but above all, it serves as a "breakwater” against the assault of the Islamist lobby that would certainly be relentless in demanding more space and privilege for Islamisation and the spread of a toxic brand of Islam.

I am convinced that Amanah, its leadership, MPs, and ministers are a far cry from the brand of Islamism that many have feared and in turn become very suspicious of. I believe Amanah’s priority is not to force the Quran and Islamic scriptures as the supreme law of the land, or to implement hudud, or narrow down the space of discourse.

This is Amanah’s chance to further the concept of "Muslim democrats” — those who care more about universal and shared values of Islam, and espouse inclusivity and pluralism. It is not only the anti-thesis of Islamism, but also a hedge against the Islamist lobby.

Now we just need to keep them in check.

* This is the personal opinion of the columnist.