A khutbah against bullying struck a deeper public nerve. Beyond classrooms and social media, many recognised the quieter cruelty of power misused—behind desks, inside offices and through systems difficult to question. When compassion is preached, but authority becomes toxic, who protects those too vulnerable to speak or be heard?
COMMENTARY
Bruneians were urged to reject bullying and spread compassion. The reaction showed that many understood its message far beyond the school gate.
By Malai Hassan Othman | KopiTalk with MHO
The khutbah spoke about bullying. The public heard something larger.
Delivered across Brunei on 28 August, the Friday sermon urged Muslims to reject intimidation, oppression and cruelty while spreading compassion throughout society.
Its message extended beyond classrooms, identifying schools, workplaces, families and online spaces as environments in which bullying can occur.
That breadth may explain why the khutbah struck such a powerful chord with public sentiment.
Soon after its message circulated, an online discussion moved rapidly from school bullying towards workplaces, businesses, public-facing services and institutional authority.
The discussion offered insufficient verifiable evidence from which broader conclusions could safely be drawn. Its significance lay instead in the experiences and perceptions brought to the surface.
Many contributors appeared to recognise the same underlying pattern: a stronger party exercising power over someone who feels unable to resist without risking further harm.
The sermon did not create that sentiment. It gave existing frustrations a moral vocabulary through which they could be expressed.
Beyond the School Gate
Bullying is commonly imagined as something children do to other children—inside classrooms, along corridors, on playing fields or increasingly through mobile telephones.
Its visible forms are easily recognised: physical aggression, insults, threats, humiliation, exclusion and the deliberate targeting of someone perceived as weaker.
But bullying does not disappear when school ends. It changes its clothes.
For a student, power may come from physical strength, popularity or the protection of a group. For an employee, it may come from rank.
For a contractor, power may lie with whoever controls an approval or payment. For an applicant, it may rest behind a counter or desk.
The common thread is not merely conflict. It is the imbalance that leaves one party feeling unable to respond without inviting greater difficulty.
The line is crossed when authority becomes intimidation, explanation gives way to humiliation, or questioning a decision appears likely to invite retaliation.
That is when authority ceases to feel like responsibility and begins to feel like coercion.
The Little Napoleon Behind the Desk
The public reaction recalled a figure KopiTalk with MHO has examined before: the so-called “Little Napoleon”.
This is rarely someone occupying the highest office. The authority may be modest, but its consequences can be considerable for those affected.
The “Little Napoleon” treats delegated responsibility as personal territory. Rules become weapons, procedure becomes a barrier, and service becomes a demonstration of control.
He—or she—may hide behind regulations without explaining them, impose requirements inconsistently or prolong a process because nobody lower down can challenge the decision.
The problem begins when limited authority is exercised without amanah, proportion, transparency or regard for its human consequences.
For the officer, it may be one more file awaiting attention. For the person outside, that file may determine whether a livelihood survives.
A delayed approval can prevent a business from opening. An unexplained payment delay can affect workers, suppliers and families far removed from the original transaction.
A junior employee repeatedly humiliated by a superior may continue reporting for duty because resignation would place the household’s income at risk.
The outward forms differ from school bullying. The inner experience—dependency, fear, humiliation and powerlessness—may feel disturbingly familiar.
When Rules Become Weapons
Rules are essential. They protect fairness only when they are applied fairly.
When requirements change without adequate explanation, or similar cases receive different treatment, people may begin to suspect that procedure depends upon personality.
When follow-up questions are treated as disrespect, the public may learn that silence is safer than seeking clarification.
When complaints return to the same office or superior being questioned, confidence in the process can weaken, however orderly the procedure may appear internally.
Trust is rarely destroyed by one dramatic incident. It is worn down through unanswered correspondence, unexplained delays and the feeling that nobody owns the problem.
An institution may consider its decision lawful and procedurally correct. The person affected may still experience the process as dismissive and demeaning.
That distinction sits close to the heart of the khutbah’s message.
Compassion is not simply feeling sorry for someone after harm has occurred. It means exercising power carefully enough to prevent unnecessary harm.
Public Service Is Still Service
Brunei’s public service is not a single, unfeeling structure.
Thousands of officers fulfil their responsibilities conscientiously, often under workloads, procedural limitations and manpower constraints invisible to members of the public.
Many serve with professionalism, patience and courtesy. Some resolve difficult cases quietly without ever receiving recognition for doing their jobs well.
The concern is whether poor conduct and defective processes are identified before isolated failures become accepted workplace culture.
An officer who humiliates the public damages more than one person’s day. The encounter can influence how a family, business or community views the institution.
People rarely separate the individual behind the counter from the organisation whose name appears above it.
Service standards must therefore measure more than whether a form was processed. They must also consider clarity, consistency, responsiveness and dignity.
Efficiency without humanity can still leave the public feeling badly served.
Not Government Alone
The online discussion produced an important counterpoint. Some contributors believed bullying and exploitation were equally serious within private workplaces.
They described low pay, excessive workloads, arbitrary contract changes, humiliation by supervisors and fear of losing employment for questioning management.
Their accounts widened the conversation beyond government.
Bullying can emerge in public offices, private companies, schools, families, associations and online communities.
It can flow from employer to employee, supervisor to subordinate, teacher to student, senior colleague to junior colleague—or sometimes in the opposite direction.
Members of the public can also bully frontline officers through verbal abuse, threats and viral accusations released before the full circumstances are understood.
Compassion cannot be demanded only from whichever side we support. The same moral standard must protect the citizen facing authority and the officer facing abuse.
It must defend employees from humiliation while allowing managers to uphold genuine standards and responsibilities.
The Silence Around Workplace Bullying
KopiTalk with MHO previously examined workplace harassment and the fear surrounding those who consider speaking out.
The recurring concerns were unequal authority, possible retaliation, uncertain reporting channels and anxiety that lodging a complaint could damage future employment.
These concerns help explain why adult bullying is often harder to see.
A bruised child may attract immediate attention. An employee who has been systematically isolated, belittled or undermined may continue appearing at work as usual.
Victims may question whether the conduct is serious enough to report. They may also wonder whether witnesses will support them when livelihoods are involved.
Some organisations have complaint mechanisms on paper. Their effectiveness depends upon whether employees trust the people receiving and investigating those complaints.
A reporting channel is not credible merely because an email address, hotline or form exists.
People need to know how confidentiality is protected, when a response can be expected and whether the reviewer is sufficiently independent.
Silence does not necessarily mean nothing happened. Sometimes, it means the affected person believes speaking will make the situation worse.
What Children Learn From Adults
In September 2025, His Majesty declared that bullying and unacceptable behaviour had no place in Brunei’s culture.
That message followed official figures showing 447 reported school-bullying cases in 2024, down from 734 during the previous year.
Government responded with disciplinary procedures, counselling, monitoring and programmes intended to strengthen empathy, intervention and student responsibility.
Those measures addressed an acknowledged problem among young people. The latest khutbah invites reflection upon the adult environments those students will eventually enter.
What happens when a child taught not to bully joins a workplace where public humiliation is regarded as normal leadership?
What happens when students are encouraged to report intimidation, but adults believe reporting workplace mistreatment may jeopardise their careers?
What lesson is absorbed when compassion is taught as personal morality but is not consistently experienced in positions of authority?
Children learn from instructions. They also learn from the society surrounding them.
A national stand against bullying must examine not only student behaviour, but also the adult behaviour children observe and may eventually inherit.
From Sermon to System
The khutbah urged witnesses not to remain silent, merely observe or ridicule victims. Instead, they should intervene appropriately and report bullying responsibly.
That advice carries an institutional obligation.
People can only report confidently when accessible channels exist, evidence is treated fairly and protection against retaliation is more than an assurance.
The challenge is to distinguish legitimate authority from intimidation—and ordinary procedural difficulty from recurring misuse of power.
Clearer service timelines, written explanations, credible appeals, protected workplace reporting and supervisory accountability would help draw that distinction.
Leadership must also recognise that dignity is part of organisational performance, not an optional courtesy offered when workloads permit.
The Islamic principle of ihsan provides a deeper measure. Competence asks whether the work was completed. Ihsan asks how conscientiously and humanely it was done.
Without ihsan, rules can become walls. Authority can lose its conscience, and service can forget the people it was established to serve.
Why the Khutbah Resonated
Moral guidance cannot be restricted to the least powerful members of society.
If bullying involves exploiting strength against someone less able to defend himself, its warning applies wherever power becomes detached from compassion.
It applies to students and teachers, managers and employees, institutions and citizens, parents and children—and social-media users shielded by anonymity.
Beneath the online anger was a concern worth stating plainly: some people do not believe they have somewhere credible to turn, or that those holding power will listen.
The khutbah struck that chord directly.
It asked Bruneians to examine bullying. The online response suggested that society may still struggle to recognise it once the bully is no longer wearing a school uniform.
That recognition should begin with ensuring that none of us—individuals, managers or institutions—uses power in ways that deny others dignity, explanation and fair recourse.
A mirror serves little purpose when it is always pointed at someone else.
Source Note
Principal references and earlier reporting:
• Ministry of Religious Affairs: Friday khutbah summary, 28 August 2026
• Media Permata: ‘Jauhi buli, sebarkan kasih sayang’
• Reddit / r/nasikatok: Public discussion prompted by the khutbah
• KopiTalk with MHO: ‘Bullying Has No Place Here’
• KopiTalk with MHO: ‘Sexual Harassment Cases Double’
• KopiTalk with MHO: ‘Little Napoleons and Red Tape’
.jpeg)
No comments:
Post a Comment