Much has been said about the candidacy of Isa Abdul Samad for the Bagan Pinang by-election in Negeri Sembilan. I wonder how much marginal originality I can write after all that. Yet, I am writing about it.
This piece is not so much to attack Isa Abdul Samad. Others have done so and I will let others who are more aggressive in their stance to take up that position. I have no appetite for harsh words when life has been kind to me. I am happy at where I am and I am not willing to go into a trance of strong words.
Rather, I am concerned with the conditioning that may come with such candidacy and its possible acceptance by voters.
A primer is necessary as a foundation of what I have to share.
UMNO disciplinary committee found Isa Abdul Samad — a former chief minister of Negeri Sembilan — guilty of corruption in 2005. This was a time when euphemism of money politics was used in place of a more direct term for reasons all may speculate. While found guilty, the issue was not brought up to the federal authority for prosecution and therefore, there was no criminal charge when the situation demanded of it.
But that was a time when UMNO could do whatever it wanted. It was pre-March 8 2008. The state was UMNO and UMNO was the state. Much like how the Communist Party of China is the People’s Republic of China and vice versa, there was no differentiation between UMNO the political party and Malaysia the state. Therefore, Isa Abdul Samad got off the hook.
He, as in the words of former Pahang state representative of Pekan, Mohd. Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz of UMNO, the former chief minister “was punished with the harshest of punishment for a politician — banished from the flock, forced to resign from all official posts.”[1] Perhaps, yet it is maybe the harshest punishment for a politician, but not as harsh as a punishment for a criminal.
In our imperfect world, politicians in the position of power with influential connections tend to get away from justice. The weight of the law is frequently not applied as firm as it should to such person of power. It is worth iterating this: Isa Abdul Samad got off the hook.
Regardless of that, there is a need to move on and his story is one of old. Issue died and it should be allowed to stay dead. After all, there is an issue of punishment and accommodation and perhaps, no matter how lightly he was punished, the society can accommodate him as long as he repents. Whether he did repent is something I am only willing to assume good faith.
Of more greater importance is the perception of corruption that the candidacy brings.
Like it or not, Pakatan Rakyat is focusing on the tainted past of the UMNO candidate. The checkered reputation of both UMNO and Isa Abdul Samad make it all too natural for Pakatan Rakyat to harp on. It is a magnet. Repeat the scenario in any other country, the issue to play is staring at one’s face. If Pakatan Rakyat had fielded a candidate tainted with corruption, Barisan Nasional would have done the same thing: attack the legitimacy of the candidate. Attack his capability to become a trustworthy lawmaker.
All of us deserve second chances. I know how badly I wanted a second chance. I got it and I cherish every moment of it here in Australia. Isa Abdul Samad may contest on the premise of second chance. Yet, the timing is most unfortunate for him. If UMNO really needed to field him, UMNO must sort out its reputation as a corrupt party first. Only then, a second chance for Isa Abdul Samad can come uncontroversially.
With regrets, or with great joy, depending on which side of the political divide one is on, UMNO has yet to clean up its house. And so, the fielding of Isa Abdul Samad — assuming he is deserving of a second chance — does not do justice to the former chief minister.
As a result, UMNO candidate and UMNO itself become a symbol of corruption, if it is not yet a symbol of one. Rather than the former chief minister reaching out for a second chance, he only strengthens UMNO’s unsavory reputation and while doing so, sullies his own sullied reputation.
This is sad because it is in the interest of all Malaysians to see the creation of competitive democracy; competitive in a way in a progressive manner, not to the bottom. UMNO simply is not living up to a standard required for a progressive competitive democracy that fights on advanced issues like the economy and the environment and not instead struggling on very basic issue of legitimacy of a candidate.
Even that, however, is not the issue at hand.
The issue at hand is that Bagan Pinang is a stronghold of UMNO and UMNO is to widely expected to win.
I am not sharing this because I am partial to Pakatan Rakyat. I am in fact quietly relishing the expectation that PAS will be beaten. My attitude towards PAS, especially against its conservative side, is one of quiet hostility. i distrust PAS, as I distrust many socially conservative individuals with power and tendency to move against individual liberty. I can say this because I am not a card-carrying member of the party that I sympathize with and my position is of mine alone.
I am writing this because, if Bagan Pinang chooses UMNO, it creates the perception that the electorates are tolerant of the culture of corruption that UMNO has not only come to identify itself with, but also strengthens with the candidacy of Isa Abdul Samad. When the electorates come to that point, one has to wonder whether the culture of corruption has spread so wide beyond UMNO and into the heart of common voters.
One would hope that voters who would vote for UMNO are UMNO members, who reason is no match for blind loyalty. Else, truly, corruption has become a way of life. No longer is corruption seen as a wrong, but rather it is being nonchalantly shoved aside and ignored.
If it is the voters and the majority at that, then truly, the perverse has won. The rot has truly spread.
That is what I fear.
[1] — Very likely, the findings of the disciplinary board are meant for internal discipline. The dos and don’ts it listed were meant as club rules and those who violate them, were punished in accordance to forms of punishment provided for. In Isa’s case he was punished with the harshest of punishment for a politician- banished from the flock, forced to resign from all official posts. Having served the punishment, we, the moral police now want to step in and punish Isa once again? We took his flesh and now we want his blood too? To make things worse, we do that via the tortured definitions of morality. The depraved past vs. the pristine future, penny wise and pound foolish etc. [The immorality of the moral high ground-2. Mohd. Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz. Sakmongkol AK47. September 30 2009]
