The Kajang move: A political solution?
That is what politics is about. And the ability (or lack thereof) to do so will make or break Anwar, as the man seeks to build a strong case to take over Putrajaya.
Nicholas Chan
When Malaysians are not attracted to chicken blood, the issue of the day for the country seems to be the “Kajang move”.
This controversial decision of PKR, or rather Pakatan Rakyat’s supremo Anwar Ibrahim in contesting the Kajang state assembly seat vacated by another PKR party member Lee Chin Cheh, has since sparked a major outcry within and outside the constituency.
It would appear that the perceived move to mobilise electoral machinery to resolve a matter seen as an internal party squabble has not been well received by the constituents and a significant portion of civil society, notwithstanding the incessant and sometimes idiosyncratic explanations offered by party strategist Rafizi Ramli and Anwar himself.
Whatever the bone of contention on Kajang, it revealed that democracy in Malaysia has indeed matured, or at least in Kajang. Voters despite giving a two-term mandate to Pakatan with a larger mandate has demonstrated their unwillingness to be taken for granted, and it had led the politicians scrambling to placate the uneasy voters. Perhaps even better, it may serve as a future reminder for politicians not to indulge in such disapproving tactics.
But is the matter of the “Kajang move” just for the sake of PKR preventing irreconcilable fragmentation of the party due to the worsening feud between party deputy president Azmin Ali and incumbent Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim, which would lead to Anwar ultimately taking over the menteri besar post?
Or is the stakes even higher as Rafizi has claimed, albeit unconvincingly, to many?
To look at the matter as a debate of whether Selangor needs a new MB would lead to a sympathetic stance for Khalid because he received the mandate both from the people and his fellow state assemblymen (and that includes PAS and DAP), and he has so far done a good job in administering Selangor.
As the post of MB or even the Prime Minister is given to the person who commands the confidence of the majority of the legislature, is administrative proficiency the quality to be looked for? Or is it leadership? The enabler of not just decision-making, but also consensus making? I would argue it would be the latter, although a leader without administrative shrewdness is a disaster, but such obliviousness would not have been very inviting to court the confidence of the majority. Be it the rakyat or the representatives.
The best case study for this is to look at some reasonable critiques (the usual unbecoming, crass laden attacks from the ultranationalists will not be unentertained) on PM Najib Razak.
Harsh voices from both sides of the political spectrum would say that the man lacks leadership. Despite initially being ambitious enough to undertake major transformative plans to liberalise Malaysia’s economy and democratise our government, the premier has been backtracking on such promises due to the lack of vigour and confidence in confronting the party hawks and rent-seekers with major vested interest.
The man known to be visible everywhere throughout the country in the form of effigies in schools, advertisements on major billboards and even on Youtube, has been largely absent from the discourse of sensitive but leadership-demanding national issues, like the “Allah” case and recent spirals of ethnoreligious incited violence.
Plainly put, there is a lack of demonstrated leadership, and the country has been asking for it; a political solution for the mirage of national problems (for example, ethnoreligious conflict, impending debt crisis) with potentially cataclysmic consequences.
Solutions that require leadership to work, as the falling apart of the 10-point solutions to the “Allah” issue, serving as the best witness.
Are the demands of the post of the Selangor MB any different? As the jewel of the crown, Selangor, the most developed and industrialised state of Malaysia with mixed and sophisticated demographics scattered across the spectrum of urban, semi-urban and rural constituencies, requires no less for leadership. A leader that is bold enough to make hard decisions, but not before seeking out the wishes of the rakyat and invoking consensus and confidence from the representatives.
This is no easy task, as Selangor is unequivocally the “unity” government (with almost equal representatives from DAP, PAS and PKR) and has since inherited a largely defiant and self-dictating religious bureaucracy.
Unlike Penang, the provision of basic goods of the state like water also suffered at the hands of dysfunctional federal-state relations. Matters like this do not just need a good keeper of state revenues to resolve (it may even involve the opening of state coffers to resolve, such as taking over water concessions and building affordable housing), but also state leadership. The same kind of leadership we demand all the way to the very top.
Since Anwar is and always has been portraying himself as the alternative brand of leadership he could offer to Barisan National’s, the “Kajang move” might prove to be the apt solution for Selangor’s woes and in time, national ones.
