Slapped with show-cause letter, Umno’s Saifuddin Abdullah declines comment

(Malay Mail Online) – Former Umno supreme council member Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah (pic) is keeping a tight lid on the show-cause letter and threat of disciplinary action against him for his alleged appearance at a recent federal opposition meeting.

Contacted today, the former deputy higher education minister told Malay Mail Online that he is “not commenting for now”.

Saifuddin, who is currently the chief executive officer of the Global Movement of Moderates (GMM), was present at the meeting as the head of Akademi Belia.

It is understood that Saifuddin was not the sole representative from his civil society at the roundtable meeting for the new opposition pact dubbed “Pakatan Harapan”, and that he had only agreed to attend based on his personal capacity.

Some of the other civil society organisations that had joined the meeting are Bersih 2.0, Hakam, Ikram and Abim.

Yesterday, Umno secretary-general Datuk Seri Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor was reported confirming that a show-cause letter had been issued to Saifuddin, with a 14-day deadline for the latter to explain why he attended a Pakatan Harapan meeting on the same day.

Failure to provide an answer to the show-cause letter within the deadline would result in Saifuddin being brought before the Umno disciplinary board, Tengku Adnan was reported saying by news portal The Malaysian Insider yesterday.

Tengku Adnan also told Malay Mail Online yesterday that Umno will take action against Saifuddin if he did actually attend the opposition’s roundtable talks, but did not specify the possible action.

Tengku Adnan also said that Umno leaders should not been seen attending or endorsing any opposition party or agenda.

Yesterday’s roundtable session on the possible successor to the defunct Pakatan Rakyat pact was also attended by the top leaders of PKR, DAP and Parti Amanah Negara.

Following the meeting, Saifuddin made veiled remarks on Twitter to say that creating an “imperfect” new leadership would be better than having no leadership in place, amid a credibility crisis faced by the current one.

It is unclear, however, whose leadership he was criticising specifically.