Karpal Singh — bad cop
Good cop, bad cop is a classic strategy. Even PAS has its version of it. You have the hardcore guys who want to implement hudud and you have the progressives (the so-called Erdogans) who promote the concept of a welfare state.
Oon Yeoh, The Edge Daily
Karpal Singh — truly a lion in the winter if there ever was one — has been roundly criticised by many people for suggesting that Pakatan Rakyat (PR) supremo Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim step down for fostering the party-hopping culture that led to the loss of Perak to Barisan Nasional (BN).
This is not the first time Karpal’s outbursts have created a stir. He is adamantly anti-hudud, to the chagrin of his PAS counterparts, and his suggestion to sue the Sultan of Perak for recognising the BN government has sparked protests by Umno Youth.
But his suggestion that Anwar step down is different for it is his own colleagues, DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang and DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng, who are criticising him. Kit Siang has gone as far as to publicly state that he was hurt by Karpal’s statement while Guan Eng says Karpal should listen to him since he is the secretary-general.
Conventional wisdom says that Karpal’s fiery comments are unhelpful to PR’s cause, especially at a time like this when they are under siege in Perak and with the PR government in Kedah possibly becoming shaky too.
His comments are certainly fodder for the local news media which have been playing it up as a sign of PR being in a state of disarray.
PR, if they are smart, can spin this around positively as a sign that within this coalition, it’s possible for leaders to agree to disagree. This is something you don’t see in BN, where when Umno says “jump” the other parties ask “How high?”
Notice how Gerakan and MCA have not spoken out against Umno’s welcoming of two former PKR state assemblymen who have been charged for corruption or against a former DAP representative who is quite possibly the most reviled MP amongst Chinese voters not just in Perak but across Malaysia.
So, Karpal’s antics can be spun positively. But there is another useful purpose for Karpal — and that is to play the role of bad cop.
DAP as a party has always been against the concept of an Islamic state and party-hopping but no one in the party is more vocal and more consistent about this than Karpal. He can afford to be. Kit Siang and Guan Eng can’t because they really have to work with PAS, which wants to establish an Islamic state, and PKR, which encourages party-hopping.
His role is to appease the hardcore DAP supporters who may feel the party is sacrificing its principles by cooperating with PAS and PKR.
Good cop, bad cop is a classic strategy. Even PAS has its version of it. You have the hardcore guys who want to implement hudud and you have the progressives (the so-called Erdogans) who promote the concept of a welfare state.
The Hadi Awangs and Mustafa Alis of the world are counter-balanced by the Husam Musas and Dzulkifli Ahmads of the world. Who is the good cop and who is the bad cop depends on whether you are conservative or liberal.
Similarly with Karpal. To many liberals, he is a loose cannon or a non-Malay ultra who needs to be contained. But to some constituents, he’s a hero who speaks his mind and protects their interests.
An important practical question is whether Karpal’s comments will hurt PR at the ballot box because it could alienate the Malays. The result of the Kuala Terengganu by-election indicates clearly that it didn’t.
Umno Youth deputy chief Khairy Jamaluddin raised the hudud issue by baiting the normally-progressive Husam Musa into saying that PAS is for hudud. Karpal made a lot of noise about that. PR still won that election.
You can be sure that BN will be playing the “derhaka” issue to the max in the run-up to the by-election in Bukit Gantang. If they do, they can be sure Karpal will not back down. But his opinion that the Sultan can be sued in his official capacity will not hurt PR’s prospects one bit. If anything, it might actually help.
