The blame game has begun

Watch as UMNO descends into internecine warfare in the coming weeks and months.

UMNO has a crisis in Perlis. Hishammuddin says the MB Azlan Man should not have been sacked as the sacking of any member is the prerogative of the UMNO Supreme Council.

As mentioned in my previous post, UMNO in the past tended to support the notion that the royalty has discretion over who to choose for MB. But in Perlis, the UMNO members there have rejected the ruler's choice, creating a bit of a constitutional crisis because the ruler doesn't seem to be backing down either.

Perlis UMNO's preferred choice, Ismail Kassim (the brother of Shahidan) has placed the blame for the crisis on the leadership of Hishammuddin and Zahid Hamidi:

"This weakness is due to the weak party leadership after Najib Abdul Razak resigned. Hishammuddin and Zahid have not fulfilled the leadership criteria so far. They can't even solve the problem of such a small state."

This kind of internecine warfare within UMNO will become more common in the weeks and months to come as UMNO people start to play the blame game.

Notice how Nur Jazlan, who was ever so quiet when he was a deputy minister, has come out to blame Najib for BN's poor showing in the general elections. This, after Khairy says he regrets not telling Najib the truth.

A battle royale UMNO can't possibly win

He actually has a good point but there's no way UMNO can win this one.

You can't have it both ways. You can't claim all along that any attempt at defying the royalty is "derhaka" and then deny that you are being "derhaka" when you, yourself, defy the royalty.

Back when it was still in power, UMNO's standard position about royal discretion was that the royalty can indeed decide who will become the MB of his state, and that the royalty does not necessarily have to accept the nominee put forth by the winning coalition.

Many legal experts say that is actually not the case. They say that in a constitutional monarchy, the royalty has to accept whoever the wining coalition nominates as its MB-designate (just like the king has to accept the nominee for PM put forth by the winning coalition).

So what happens when the royalty refuses to accept a nominee put forth by the winning coalition? Well, it sparks a constitutional crisis from which there can be two possible outcomes. The winning coalition could challenge this in court and try to force the royalty to accept its nominee or the winning coalition can lick its wounds and accept the person the royalty prefers.

This scenario actually happened in Selangor, in the previous election (GE13), when Pakatan put forth Wan Azizah as its MB-designate but the royalty preferred Azmin Ali. Pakatan could have stood its ground and challenge the constitutionality of that decision but it decided to accept the royalty's choice.

Pakatan basically did a cost-benefit analysis and concluded that there would be too much collateral damage from a court battle with the royalty. You've got to pick your battles and they decided this one was not worth fighting over. Azmin and Wan Azizah might be from different factions but they are, after all, from the same party. Azmin as MB was an option they could live with.

When Selangor looked to be heading towards a constitutional crisis, we didn't hear a single UMNO leader argue that there is no point in having a general election if the party that won is unable to propose its own MB. But that's exactly what Shahidan Kassim is now saying about the Perlis situation:

"There is no point in having a general election if the party that won is unable to propose its own Mentri Besar."

Isn't this "derhaka" by UMNO's own definition? I guess it's not when an UMNO leader is the one saying it. But this is a fight a severely weakened UMNO can't possibly win.

Already the Perlis royal family has responded with a police report saying Shahidan's comments must have offended the ruler. Meanwhile the Perlis state secretary has said that Azlan Man's (the ruler's choice) appointment as MB is valid.

Is UMNO going to stand its ground and refuse to accept the ruler's choice? Or will it capitulate? If it's any indication, you already have Hishammuddin saying that UMNO should respect the ruler's decision.

Ironically, Shahidan actually has a good point. Why bother with an election if the winning side can't choose its own leaders?

It's hard to argue with the logic of that point but because UMNO has for so long been supportive of the notion that the royalty actually has discretion when it comes to choosing the MB, it can't now turn around and endorse Shahidan's position on the matter.

So what will happen? Two likely outcomes:
i) UMNO accepts whomever the ruler chooses as MB
ii) UMNO refuses to accept this and fresh polls are called (resulting in UMNO probably losing the state because people are so fed-up with all the power play going on)

The second outcome is worse for UMNO than the first but either way, UMNO loses. Like Pakatan did in the Selangor crisis, UMNO would do well to choose its battles wisely. After getting such a drubbing in the general elections, now is not exactly the best time to pick a fight with the royalty. Hishammuddin himself has commented on this, saying:

"At a time when UMNO is still in the recovery process, the people are watching and assessing our every action."

Call it "karma". Call it "what goes around comes around". Call it "chickens coming home to roost". Call it what you will. But UMNO is finally getting a taste of its own medicine. And it's pretty bitter. 

UMNO playing a dangerous game in Perlis

Shahidan playing a very dangerous game.

It's rare for UMNO to be in a collision course with the royalty. Usually, UMNO would be the first to shout "derhaka" if anyone in Pakatan Rakyat/Harapan were to do anything that can be construed as going against the royalty.

Yet, in Perlis you had a situation where none of the BN state assemblymen show up for the swearing in of the Menteri Besar. This has made the Raja of Perlis angry.

"They (the nine assemblypersons) did not show any respect for this ceremony and if we allow this to continue, more than this would happen."

The issue is Shahidan, the state BN leader, wanted his brother to become the MB but the ruler chose someone else instead. To this, Shahidan says:

"We contested in the general election. We have a right to determine who our leader is."

Under normal circumstances, UMNO leaders would be shouting "derhaka" towards anyone who dares say such a thing, although constitutionally, it is probably correct. So, it seems whether something is "derhaka" or not all comes down to whose ox is being gored.

UMNO has subsequently sacked the ruler-chosen MB Azlan Man from the party so he is now an independent MB. That situation is obviously untenable since he now no longer commands the support of the other UMNO reps. This might force the ruler to choose a new MB or it might spark a constitutional crisis if the ruler refuses to do so.

There is also a third possibility, which is that some UMNO reps jump ship and support Azlan instead. BN had won 10 of the 15 state seats. With Azlan kicked out, they now have nine seats only. Pakatan has three while PAS has two. If they team up with Azlan, that's a total of six seats. If just two BN reps switch over, they would have eight seats out of 15, which is a majority. Then BN loses the state.

Winning the PR game

A pay cut of 10% won't make a difference but it's good for public relations.

Is it absolutely critical that Pakatan fulfill every single one of its Manifesto promises within exactly 100 days? No, it's not. Some things might take a while to implement. But from a public relations standpoint, it's important to have a few quick wins.

That's why despite Zeti saying GST might take some time to dismantle (possibly more than 100 days), Dr M came out and said we won't have any GST by June. This is being done by bringing the GST rate down to 0% while the officials work on actually dismantling it. The effect is the same as it being removed though. And as far as the general public is concerned, Pakatan has fulfilled its promise about GST faster than expected. Something's going to be done with the tolls soon which will make many people happy as well.

All these quick wins are about winning the public relations war. Pakatan has to show very quickly that it is different from the previous administration. It had promised change and it wants to show tangible change very quickly.

Recently, Dr M revealed that the country has over 1 trillion ringgit in debt. He subsequently announced that the Cabinet has agreed to a pay cut of 10% as part of the government's austerity measures.

Frankly, when you're talking about a trillion ringgit in debt, a 10% pay cut in  minister's salary is not going to make any difference. But in PR terms it's a good soundbite especially in light of the previous administration's excesses not just with the 1MDB mega-scandal but everyday stuff like cronyism and overspending at the tourism ministry.

Let's have more tell-all press conferences

We need more tell-all's, not less.

Mohd Shukri Abdull's tell-all press conference sounded like something from out of a movie but it's all there out in the open for the authorities to investigate and verify. In some cases, he named names and in some cases he alluded to who he was referring to overall it was a very candid account of what he went through. After suffering through years of rampant corruption it's high time some high level officials like Shukri reveal things like he did.

There has been some backlash. Bar Council President George Varughese has called Shukri's comments "inappropriate". DAP's Ramkarpal Singh has said that the comments could "jeopardize" the 1MDB investigation. 1MDB Committee Chairperson Abu Talib Othman said the comments could "prejudice" the investigation.

However, prominent lawyer Syahredzan Johan has said he does not think Shukri’s statements would prejudice any ongoing probes as they described alleged government interference into investigations, and not any wrongdoing by 1MDB per se.

"The press conference is not about the alleged offence itself, but about alleged interference into investigations by the government. It must be remembered that we do not have a jury system, where such statements may influence jurors in the future."

I'm with Syahredzan on this matter. I want more officials to give tell-all press conferences. We've all been in the dark about misdeeds for so long. It's time for more transparency not less.

PAS fared horribly in GE14

No, PAS did not do well.

There is this general (mis)perception that PAS did well in GE14 because it managed to get 18 federal seats and won control of two states.

As I had pointed out in an earlier post, winning 18 federal seats is actually a worse performance than it did in GE13 where it had won 21 seats, which in itself is worse than the 23 seats it had won in GE12.

The fact that PAS had won over Terengganu this time around is also no big deal. It had won Terengganu in GE10 and subsequently lost it in GE11. In GE12 it had won Kedah but also subsequently lost it in GE13. Given its track record of losing a newly-acquired state after just one election cycle, PAS will probably lose Terengganu in GE15 (though it would be to Pakatan rather than BN, which would be a non-player by then).

Now, what about this statistic: In GE13, PAS had gotten a total of 1,633,389 votes but in GE14 that number had increased to 2,043,159. Isn't that proof that PAS has become more popular?

No.

Syed Husin Ali explains why: PAS experienced an increase in the number of votes received because it had fielded way more candidates than ever before. Their success rate was abysmal though.

PAS had fielded 158 parliamentary candidates in GE14, of whom only 18 were elected, This translates to a miserable 11.4% success rate. (In contrast DAP had fielded 47 candidates and won 42, which translate to an 89% success rate). PAS also holds the dubious distinction of having a record 54 of its federal candidates lose their deposits (meaning these guys actually got less than 12.5% of the total votes cast).

Like I said before, a green tsunami this is not.

Politically-motivated cases should be dropped

His case was clearly politically motivated. All such cases should be thrown out.

For a while it was somewhat uncertain whether Lim Guan Eng can be sworn in as the Finance Minister because he has a pending corruption trial. Turns out he has been sworn in.

Guan Eng's trial has been postponed as he is seeking to have the case dismissed by a new Attorney-General. Will it be dismissed as a politically-motivated charge?

MCA Publicity Spokesman Ti Lian Ker says the proposal for Guan Eng’s corruption charges to be dropped reeks strongly of political interference.

In a way it's true. If Najib and BN had won the election, no way would Guan Eng have a ghost of a chance of having his charges dropped. So which coalition is in charge does make a difference.

On the surface, Ti's call for the due process of the law to be "respected and followed" sounds like a reasonable argument. But only if in fact the charges were not at all politically-motivated. If the charges were flawed from the start, it wold be a miscarriage of justice and a waste of time and taxpayer money to proceed with the trial.

Lawyers for Liberty have said as much, calling for a review of all politically-motivated cases. To quote its executive director, Eric Paulsen:

"It will be a waste of time and public resources if the AGC continues to pursue these cases with the same politically-motivated vigour that they did under the previous administration. Worse still, it will undermine public trust in the current Harapan government and also the AGC, given the incompatibility of the promise of repealing these (oppresssive) laws on the one hand whilst continuing to prosecute individuals under them on the other."

That's why it was perfectly ethical to secure a pardon for Anwar as well as to seek for Guan Eng's charges to be thrown out. Both cases were clearly political.

Finally an MCA man tells it like it is

Chew correctly identifies MCA's main problem: being a lapdog to UMNO.

MCA has been deluding itself for so long that even in the face of its near total wipe-out (just one federal seat) it still can't see what's wrong with the party and with BN. Except for one man: Bandar Tun Razak MCA chief Chew Yin Keen. So far, he is the only MCA man who has correctly articulated the real reason Chinese voters have rejected MCA:

Lapdog
He said MCA is perceived in the Chinese community as a "yes-man" to UMNO.

***************

Chew also articulated the other key issues that affected BN in general (and by association, MCA):

The Najib factor
"In fact, it is well-known fact that the main reason for the defeat and the loss of federal power by BN in the general election is the scandals surrounding the outgoing prime minister Najib Abdul Razak and his family members, especially the 1MDB and RM2.6 billion 'political donation'."

GST
Chew said other factors for MCA's defeat include the good and services tax (GST), which had burdened the people including the Malay community which had traditionally backed BN.

Gerrymandering
"Another factor that caused the defeat of BN was the re-delineation of election boundary that the people, especially young voters, deemed the BN government as cheating the people’s rights as well as being unjust and unfair to the opposition. This caused the uprising of young and educated voters to rebel against BN."

Why BN can't reform itself

The loyal opposition. Goodness gracious!

I have been thinking for a few days now about writing a blog post about all the reasons why BN/UMNO cannot reform itself. Then someone wrote an article that articulates the reasons far better than I could have myself. So instead of reinventing the wheel, here are the key points from that article (by Dennis Ignatius):

On the state of UMNO:

Umno is a broken party now – morally bankrupt, politically exhausted, without credibility, purpose or direction, and utterly bereft of the kind of leadership it will need to reinvent itself.

Why it will be difficult for UMNO to even retain existing members:

The whole premise of its existence has been challenged and found wanting. Cut off from sources of easy money, the system of money politics that has long sustained the party will collapse. Without the prospect of immediate position, power and profit, how many will even remain in Umno?

Why the current leadership is useless:

The present leadership is too closely linked with the culture of corruption, racism and entitlement to be acceptable, at least at this time. They were happy to stand with deposed president Najib Abdul Razak, even vociferously defending and praising him, despite all the evidence of wrongdoing. Half-hearted contrition now that their misdeeds are on public display just doesn’t carry much weight. They chose to stand on the wrong side of history and must now share Najib’s fate in defeat.

Why it can't be an effective opposition:

With zero credibility and zero integrity, how will they hold the Harapan government to account? How will they defend our democratic rights, for example, after having done so much to destroy it? How will Umno help ensure that power does not corrupt the Harapan government when almost all of the present senior leadership are themselves suspect in the eyes of the public?

Najib Razak -- donation magnet

Damn, he's good at getting donations.

If Najib Razak is good at something it's attracting free money.

First he says the RM2.6 billion he got in 2013 was from some wealthy Arab donor. Imagine that... a RM2.6 billion no-strings-attached donation, just like that.

Now, he says the cash that the police seized from his Pavilion Residences (China Press claims the amount was RM1.2 million) were also donations.

This guy must the ultimate fund-raiser. He can get donors to give him free money just like that!