What next, MIC?

ARCHIVES 2009

By MT Webmaster On Sep 14, 2009

While he accepted the result, Subramaniam said delegates had either missed or refused to understand Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak's call for an end to arrogance and seeking popularity within the party for positions, instead of truly winning the hearts of the masses.

Written by Surin Murugiah, The Edge

TWO of the country's biggest Tamil dailies carried contrasting headlines yesterday — one boldly declaring the victor, and the other claiming money politics caused the downfall of the vanquished in the MIC elections on Saturday.

Last weekend's 63rd annual general meeting of the MIC saw the hottest and bitterly contested election for the position of deputy president in the party's history, which went to Datuk G Palanivel, who had the full backing of party supremo Datuk Seri S Samy Vellu.

While the Samy Vellu-controlled Tamil Nesan said Palanivel vetri ("Palanivel wins"), its nemesis Makkal Osai screamed Money politics defeats (former deputy president Datuk S) Subramaniam.

Whatever the headline, the end-result does little to point the direction of the party that claims to champion the rights of Indians in the country.

Nor does it clearly outline the succession plan for the party presidency as Samy Vellu still refuses to say when, and if, he would step down to pave the way for the next leader.

By not making a stand, it is almost tantamount to saying the party still does not have a leader with calibre.

Which begs the next question — why all the hullabaloo of backing a team, to whom he is not confident of handing over the reins of the party? Such is his grip on the party that Samy Vellu is still able to dictate terms to its members as to who to vote for.

For the party itself, the final line-up saw all the president's men take up key positions, much to the dismay of Subramaniam who claimed that unabashed, open, money politics caused his defeat.

He said delegates had been paid at least RM300 to not vote for him.

The irony is that if he had won the deputy president's post, he could still have been packed off as there is a pending disciplinary hearing against him on allegations of tarnishing the image of the party.

Indeed, when a question was put to Subramaniam if the party went ahead with the hearing now and expelled him, he said: "I can't be bothered. They can do whatever they like."

Last Saturday's decision could see the end of his political career, but the margin of votes by which he lost shows that there is discontent among the party ranks, setting the stage for future candidates to believe that all is not lost for a change in the way the party leadership is selected.

Subramaniam lost by a slim margin of 82 votes, having secured 547 votes to Palanivel's 629. This was a huge improvement for a man who lost by 495 votes in 2006.

Clearly, the combined votes of Subramaniam and the other contender Datuk S Sothinathan (280) are more than what Palanivel garnered, showing he did not have the full support of delegates.

As such, the party is still split as to who should be its next leader, going by the voting pattern.

Until and unless this is resolved, the party will find itself grappling with infighting rather than collectively move ahead to address the community's problems.

On another note, Samy Vellu in his speech to delegates sang praises of how Najib has shown commitment to the welfare of the Indians, referring to the various allocations given out by the government.

These include funds for Tamil schools, grants for entrepreneurs, and review of appointments to the civil service.

But when asked later if the measures were genuinely for the upliftment of Indians in the country or a political move to save the Barisan Nasional (BN), Samy Vellu replied: "I will not answer that, it will become political."

Why would he say so if he indeed believed that the government was trying to address the grievances of the community?

Samy Vellu, in his speech and when talking to reporters, blamed the government squarely for the predicaments of the Indian community in Malaysia over the past 52 years.

He took swipes at former premier Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad for the community being sidelined, responding to Mahathir's statement that the MIC fared badly in the March 2008 general election because of Samy Vellu's refusal to step down gracefully.

Claiming he had documented evidence that the party had requested much from the Mahathir administration and received little in return, he said it is only now under Najib that things had improved.

Yet, he would not openly say if the measures now are genuine and sustainable.

Contradiction of sorts, one might surmise.

The MIC elections on Saturday also showed the split among members, not just by the voting but going by the large number of Subramaniam supporters wearing T-shirts with his image, and those in traditional outfits mirroring Samy Vellu and Palanivel.

Party workers and observers admit that the split in the party runs deep, and that this does not augur well for the Indians.

Splinter groups from the party as well as parties that were formed from the now outlawed Hindraf all claim to represent Indian issues. There are at least eight parties that claim to do this now.

Given that the community makes up a minor percentage of the population, with so many political parties with different agendas, it would be impossible to move forward.

The MIC must return to its original course as set by its founding fathers, and its late leader Tun VT Sambanthan who played a crucial role in securing the independence of Malaya together with its Allied Front partners, if it wants to remain relevant.

For that, it has to truly and holistically change its thinking and approach, and perhaps take a leaf from Najib's advice.