When Kita was launched the previous Wednesday at the Sime Darby Convention Hall, Zaid Ibrahim who had also launched his first book there, said that his party is more about governance and not just forming the government.

His first book defines most of the issues and concerns of his. It was launched by Musa Hitam.

The subject of governance has been at the heart of my study interest for many years. Therefore, it was interesting for me to sincerely hear a political leader who knows the difference between the two words; and make it his central issue at hand. Well done Zaid Ibrahim ( left ).

You have written, argued, quarreled and now seek to lead others in the direction of your conviction. May God bless your efforts!

I have been a student of the subject of governance since my Form Six days.

We read Amitai Etzioni\’s ‘Modern Organisations\’, studied the British government structure and processes of Westminster democracy and even visited the Malaysian Parliament as students in 1968.

Governance is about the three identifiable sectors of focused people interest in any nation.

It focuses on the process of mobilisation for democratic control of power and authority, and then making sure that the same power is balanced and checked by different processes and institutions.

Their ultimate goal is to churn out public goods and services that serve the public and national interest. These three arms are usually labeled the public or political sector, the private or business sector and the civil society or community sector.

But, even such a structure only includes those who are ‘organised to participate\’ or the ‘connected few\’ in each of the three sectors. Where then do the marginalised or the unconnected fit in?

Formal government involves the three legitimate arms of the legislature, the judiciary, and the executive defined and given authority by the Constitution to govern the nation vide political power.

Usually the full power of governance is with the elected government (i.e. an alternative between choices of parties within the political sector of governance) of the day; which then seeks to influence the other two functions to also go along with their declared and publicised agenda for their form of governance.

In the UK and US the legislature is identifiably different from the executive in the process of operations.

In Malaysia there is an extreme overlap between these two and therefore governance is always compromised because the executive often articulates, interprets and enforces legislation in their own terms.

\"NONE\"

Then, when the judiciary is also overlapped with the executive, with an attorney-general who is completely subservient to the executive, we have more injustice than justice. Teoh Beng Hock ( right ) is only one victim of such poor governance of the nation!

Moreover because all human systems are never perfect, or because of the second law of thermodynamics wherein most systems lose energy over time, our organisations and institutions of governance are never operationally perfect and therefore there is an uncompromising need for the role of other players; like the professional public services, and the media to become an imperative for good or excellent governance.

I call these requisite functions the fourth and fifth estates of good governance.

It always remains the responsibility of the fourth and fifth sectors to ensure professional governance which is executed transparently and openly for delivery of the needed goods and services to all and sundry; including the marginalised.

 Checks and balances

In Malaysia today, the marginalised are rather unfortunately neglected.

Why? It is primarily because the control systems of checks and balances have been neutralised over the two decades of power and corruption of absolute categories.

The public services have now become totally beholden to the ruling political system and therefore blindly submissive to all such power and authority.

There was a time in Malaysia when the public servants when told to do something would ask why that specific idea and not some other A or B or C as an agenda? Policy options were once a reality.

Today, I am told when asked to undertake any project; they only ask the details of the project specification and who the contract should be assigned to!

Unprofessionalism is now an ingrained value or seen the other way the \”politicisation of the public service is now the order of the day.\”

Public servants have moved to become project managers instead of assuming the role of policy advisors. Therefore those who are compliant and obedient to their political masters are the ones amply rewarded.

Titles and board appointments are only part of such good behavior perks!

 Millions lost

Today also I am told that there is a new value applied towards the further politicisation of the GLC sector.

While GLCs as government-linked companies exist with a public and somewhat political mandate, their governance should not become a matter of pure and crass politics.

How else can we lose billions vide public agencies and their subsidiaries whether we call it Sime Darby, chaired by a former DPM, or PKFZ, chaired by a former minister?

Worse still today I hear that all chairpersons of public agencies and GLCs are today being loaded with politicians; many of whom have their own agendas!

The fundamental distinction between government and governance is therefore important and crucial. The elected government is only the legitimate authority of a nation for good governance but the nature and process of good governance is something distinctly different.

For example, the appointment of the state secretary of the Selangor state government is not a matter for the ‘notional ruler\’ of the state to decide.

In any democracy, the purpose of alternative choices of governments is precisely for the longer term check and balance against all kinds of authoritative tendencies. March 8 was the people of Malaysia, and especially of Selangor saying, yes we want change!

Therefore with the wrongful appointment of the state secretary of Selangor, the state government cannot now demand that the state legislature hand over all permission for such authority of appointment to ‘the notional ruler of the state.\’

In a true democracy it is always the rule of the people, by the people and for the people!

My prayer is that all CEOs of states and all ministers understand the simple but important distinction between governments; as authority and power, and governance, which focuses on the processes of decision-making for all public interest issues; whether national or merely for a state.

May God bless Malaysia!