Can democracy come out of the barrel of a gun? That has been the question haunting PKR since the current spiral of agitation the so called third face their ring leader Harris Ibrahim
Power is the glue of politics. That is why a government is expected to be in array and opposition generally in disarray. Ideology is a fickle custodian of unity in an age of convenience. Its absence has eliminated the difference between single-party rule and coalition government. Both are held together by individual or sectarian self-interest, which is why they last. Ideology is a differentiator; it makes a partnership untenable even if the partners consider it sustainable. Sentiment is irrelevant to any political marriage. This is true of all democracies where coalitions become necessary. Politicians live for power; why would they invite a premature death?
It would be a natural conclusion for most that the 'moral', since it includes pious beliefs and undocumented matters of conscience, should be inclusive of 'justice'. Morality is learnt as one grows in his philosophy, faith, or religion. Simple derivatives as not to lie, steal, hurt or cheat are basic to all legal thinking. Morality, may further be escalated to include self-imposed restrictions as not to hurt with thought or word, even pray for someone's well-being. Justice gives you no marks for all this. Justice does not differentiate between a common man and a saint. Besides, justice acquits a crime if there be no proof, whereas the gates of heaven are closed for sinners. Why then, should the dome of moral canopy, bend towards justice? In other words, does 'justice', which is a man-made system to dispense law, supersede the value system, abeyance and 'morality' as defined by an ideology or religion? What matters more for peace on this earth, a legal right or a 'moral victory'?
There are different types of leadership. The problem with charismatic leadership is that it does not survive the charismatic leader. The problem with Azmin is that he is more of a charismatic leader. Zaid Ibrahim has none of the charisma but makes up for it in terms of his ability to lead based on pure leadership and organizational skills.I must say I admire you for your courage in resigning from the cabinet on the issue of the Internal Security Act and your efforts at trying to make amends for the judicial crisis in 1987. Congratulations. It is unfortunate that you did not win the Hulu Selangor by-election. I have read your book, I, too, am Malay and am truly inspired.But I have yet to get a satisfactory answer on a few questions. I had been hoping more people to ask these questions but it seems that you are a darling of the liberal media which would not bother you on these issues. But I really hope to get honest answers on these questions.First, the issue of your stand at the beginning of the judicial crisis in 1987. Was it true that you formed the Muslim Lawyers Association upon Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s instruction in order to counter the Bar Council’s critical stand?Why did you form the association when we all knew that, at least at that point in your life, you led a very liberal lifestyle? While you claimed you did not endorse the sacking of Lord President Salleh Abas, you accepted Hamid Omar to chair the tribunal to try Salleh and distanced yourself from the Bar Council’s boycott of Hamid.You continued with your battles with the Bar Council in 1992 when you proposed Justice Minister Syed Hamid Albar to be made president of the Bar Council.Secondly, the growth of Zaid Ibrahim & Co to become Malaysia’s biggest legal firm. As much as I would like to think that Zico was a success on its own, many have pointed out that your firm was rewarded with contracts following your support for Mahathir during the judicial crisis and the Umno split.Is it true you benefitted from Umno through the awards of contracts from UEM and Bakun? I remember you were even investigated for insider trading with Bashir Ismail and Bank Bumiputera chairperson and Renong Berhad executive chairperson, Halim Saad.Thirdly, your love-hate relationship with PKR. My friends in Gerakan informed me that you considered joining Gerakan before actually joining PKR. I congratulate you for having that courage.But shortly after being appointed to the Political Bureau, you then expressed your desire to take a six-month leave. Subsequently you returned to the Political Bureau. Yet you continued blogging against the party leadership.Don’t get me wrong, I am all for freedom of speech but also there should be collective responsibility. Why, if you are really unhappy with PKR, accept the nomination for Hulu Selangor and subsequently as Wilayah Perseketuan PKR chief?While you have criticised the party at many junctures, I believe to be fair, the party has given you many responsibilities in spite of being new and critical. It would be good once in a while for you to have something good to say to friends who have been in the party much longer than you have.I hope you can answer these questions so that I can truly be assured of your commitment to change and reform.
— Leading contender for the PKR deputy presidency contest Datuk Zaid Ibrahim warned its members today that the party risks turning into another Umno unless there is a leadership change.
The former de facto law minister, who was sacked from Umno in late 2008, said PKR has been plagued with problems such as defection of lawmakers which is not faced by its Pakatan Rakyat (PR) partners DAP and PAS.
”Everyone says PKR is a weak party,” said Zaid in an interview published in today’s edition of Sin Chew Daily.
The former Kota Bahru MP who joined PKR in June last year said the party has lost its original direction and risks becoming the ‘second Umno’.
He claimed PKR is facing the same problems as Umno and Malaysia and so a leadership change is needed for improvement.
“If you (members) want these problems to continue, you can elect the same leadership. If you want changes, you have to change the leaders. The same leaders will result in the same problems,” said Zaid who coordinated the framing of PR’s common policy platform, launched in December last year.
Zaid is supporting party de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to contest the party presidency in order to legitimise his position as the PKR chief.
Supporters of another contender, Azmin Ali, however want the status quo to be maintained with Anwar continue holding the unelected position while his wife Datuk Seri Wan Azizah Wan Ismail serves as president.
Anwar had said that he would decline nomination to contest in the party polls.
The post of de facto leader was created after party election 2007 as a compromise between two groups who wanted Anwar to contest the presidency and the other who were against it, fearing that the party would be deregistered as the former deputy prime minister was at that time banned from holding any elected political posts.
The ban expired in April 2008.
Zaid previously alleged that since announcing his intention to contest late last month, his loyalty to the party has been questioned and he was also accused of working for former finance minister Tun Daim Zainuddin to destroy PKR.
He also claimed that he was warned that he risk being “buried” — the way the late Tun Ghafar Baba had been in the 1993 Umno party election — if he chooses to stay in the race.
Then, Ghafar only received four nominations in that contest and withdrew from the race in favour of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.
Some 400,000 PKR members will vote beginning this weekend until November 21.
The party amended its constitution last year allowing all members to vote for divisional leaders and the 25 members of the central leadership council — including the president, deputy president and four vice-presidents.
The party’s 218 divisions will hold two separate meetings: One for the annual general meeting and election of divisional leaders, and a second meeting to vote for national leaders.
The divisions will vote for national leaders over several weekends, from October 29 to November 21.
No comments:
Post a Comment