Let us take a look at the issue rationally and impartially without being clouded by emotion and feelings. Let’s compare apple with apple, then we will be able to see who is more reliable, trustworthy and with integrity.
Nizar was said to commit treason towards the Sultan of Perak when he refused to give up his MB post. His act in still going to his office and staying in the MB official residence (Nizar has later agreed to vacate the official residence) serve as proof.
Now, when the Terengganu Palace wanted Ahmad Said as the new MB, the untouchable President of UMNO wanted his own candidate, the then incumbent Idris Jusoh. As much as the Palace insisted in having Ahmad Said as the new MB, the UMNO President was hesitated to accept him and adamant to have Idris Jusoh instead. Ahmad Said was threatened with possibility of facing disciplinary action within UMNO for going against the wish of UMNO President. Only after much hesitation the UMNO President agreed with the Palace’s choice of Mohd Said as the new MB.
So, if Nizar is said to have committed treason, what about Abdullah, the untouchable UMNO President? Do you see any difference in the case of Nizar as compared to Abdullah? They are alike.
I am totally and without any hesitation condemning any act of party hopping regardless of the political party involve. It is just unethical though legal. I am supporting to have the law of party hopping but I wonder why our politician especially the government refused to have such a law.
Our politicians must understand that majority of the voters vote the party instead of the candidate. Like in my case. I do not know the background of the candidates contesting in my area but I have to vote anyway. So, if I can’t judge the candidate, I will have to judge the party. So, my vote goes to the party and not the candidate.
Now, when the candidate jump ship and hopping to another party, do not you think that he/she has betrayed the trust majority of voters put in him/her? Do not you think that if he/she had contested under the banner of his/her new party that he/she hopped into during the election, he/she may have lost the election?
From another aspect, when candidates contest in any election, they are being supported morally and financially by their party. Now, is it fair to the party if after investing so much resources to their candidates only to have their candidates hop to another party?
So, party hopping, no matter from any angle you look at it, is not ethical and not acceptable. Even Abdullah said that party hoppers have no integrity (wonder why now he accepted the 3 independent friendly assemblymen and accepting back the Bota Assemblyman).
Anwar Ibrahim made a big huha about taking over the federal government from BN through MPs crossover (the nicer word for party hopping). It did not materialize. BN leaders condemn like hell the initiative made by Anwar. I disagree with Anwar. The it happened in Perak when the shameless and the “no-pride” BN assemblyman from Bota hopped to PKR citing loss of confidence in BN leadership as his cause. About 10 days later, that very same guy switched back to UMNO and at the same time, 2 PKR and 1 DAP assemblymen chose to become a “friendly independent” assemblymen to BN. So, while BN leaders condemned Anwar for resorting to party hopping vis-à-vis the 16th September date, they do the same. The fact that Anwar initiated the party hopping does not justify the BN to follow suit. The 3 “independent friendly” assemblymen to BN, in my opinion are now taking a break at R&R before proceeding with their journey to their destination (BN). It is just a matter of time for them to join BN. Don’t believe me? Then are you going to believe those politicians?
While BN now has the majority support after taking into consideration of the 3 “friendly independent” assemblymen, the issue that is still not clearly answered is whether the BN has the majority support of the people in Perak? The fact that they have got enough support to be able to topple the PR government in Perak, does not in any way whatsoever indicates that they too have the majority support of the Perakians. So, if we were to look back at the principle of democracy that BN has been barking all these while, is this democracy?
They have Nizar as the MB and another Pas assemblyman as an EXCO being in charge of Islamic affairs. Apart from these 2, they also have the 2 PKR assemblymen who has chosen to become “independent friendly” to BN (note that 1 of them was a postman). Other than these 4 assemblymen, the rest in the team were non-Malays and the majority was actually from the DAP. So, do you think Nizar has control over his line of EXCO? Please remember that the DAP wanted their own MB, as they have the most seat among the PR component party. They even, at one time wanted to boycott the swearing in of Nizar as the new MB. So, though Perak had Nizar as the MB, I strongly believe that the government was being controlled by the DAP. Remember about the new village in Grik? Does not that tell you of anything?
So, now, the wisdom behind the decision made by the Sultan of Perak not to dissolve the State Assembly to give way for fresh election should be viewed by the Malays, regardless of their political party in a more broad way for the benefit of the Malays. Look here. If the State Assembly was being dissolved. A fresh election were to be called. Considering the current political situation, who do you think will win the election? Obviously the PR. So, it will go back to status quo where the Perak people will have a government that is being controlled by DAP though they may have a Malay MB from either PAS or PKR. As such, if we look from this angle (benefit of the Malays), we should now start to appreciate what Sultan Azlan Shah has done. After all, he is a brilliant Sultan and was out former Lord President. Do you still think that he made decision without thinking the consequences? I don’t think so.
Disrespect the Sultan
So many police reports were lodged against Karpal for making a statement that the Sultan of Perak can be sued in his official capacity. Karpal is said to have shown his disrespect towards the Sultan. There was also called by several parties for Karpal to be banned from entering Perak.
Now, let us take a look what happened shortly after the 12th General Election. As I said earlier, Abdullah couldn’t accept the fact that the Terengganu Palace had its own candidate for MB post as opposed to Abdullah’s own choice. And as I said earlier, to certain extent, Abdullah had shown his disagreement with the Terengganu Palace over the latter’s choice of MB. There were also police reports lodged against Abdullah for treason. Now, why was it no one requested the Terengganu Palace to ban Abdullah from entering Terengganu? What difference was it between Karpal’s case and Abdullah’s case. To me, none. So, so much so that people think that Karpal has disrespected the Sultan of Perak, so did Abdullah towards the Sultan of Terengganu.
As I said in my previous posting, if we do not know how to respect our parents, do not expect others to respect them.
Protest against the Sultan
There was really massive street demonstration in Kuala Kangsar in front of the Palace opposing the Sultan’s decision to hand over the state government to BN. The protesters were said to be the opposition supporters from PR. However, if you watched the news in TV on the protest (where 1 guy lied down on the road to block the convoy of Raja Dr. Nazrin Shah), can you see any Chinese or DAP supporters. I do not recall seeing any. What I remember seeing was PAS and PKR supporters marching and said “lailahaillallah” and “Allahu Akbar”. So, who is the stupidest among the PR component party and who is the most brilliant one? DAP was smart enough not to be involved in the street demonstration and left it to PAS and PKR (the specialists in street demo). At least, for that, it was PAS and PKR (I mean the Malays) who were being rude to the Sultan and not DAP (non-Malays).
So, now who is more reliable? BN or PR? To me both are not reliable. Both have made politics dirty and both are dirty people. Sometimes we hear people said, “if you can’t choose the better one, choose the one that is less evil”. However, in this case, both parties are equally evil. So, which party are we supposed to choose. Easy question but hard to answer.