\”Political integrity means just plain honesty in politics. One of the most important things is never to deceive the people. Any politician who deceives the people either for the sake of his party or because he imagines it\’s for the sake of the people, is lacking in political integrity.\” Aung San Suu Kyi

Do we understand this concept of political integrity? It is easy for our foreign affairs minister to talk in support of Suu Kyi, but do we understand what she really stands for? Does our government have political integrity in relation to how it dealt with the Lingam tape?

Is it simply chance that the Malaysian Bar marched as a force of 2,000 for the cause of justice? When lawyers take their professional oath before judges, what does it mean when they march against alleged corruption of the judiciary?

Does the de facto law minister, a so-called lawyer himself, understand Federal Constitution 101? He does not see a crisis when practising lawyers see one! I believe there may have been some former judges in the \’walk for justice\’ because they are lawyers first, and uphold the constitution too.

Let us see how Justice is rolled out under the Umno Baru philosophy and under Islam Hadhari of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

Umno Baru, do you not realise where you have taken the countrynow you are trying to stack the deck with one of your kind appointed straight into the Federal Court? Am I making all this up?

Look at the comedy of errors. First, the chief justice issued a statement that he had no comment on the inference that he was the other party in the telephone conversation recorded on the \’Lingam tape\’.

\"\"

Next, the de facto law minister (technically, only a minister without portfolio in PM\’s Department) issues a statement that the chief justice had contacted him to deny involvement in the phone conversation. Asked by what authority he did that, he said it was because he is the \”CJ\’s minister\”.

Really? Since when did the minister in the PM\’s Department have jurisdiction over the chief justice? Which constitution is the minister reading – the Umno Baru one? This was more than a Freudian slip. It was said with intention to deceive and mislead.

My Islamic philosopher friend, Prof SH Nasr, often cites the saying, \’A veil reveals as much as it hides\’.

\’Presidential State\’

In Political Governance 101, students of basic political science and constitutional democracy are taught about the three arms of governance in any political democracy. These are the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary. Some argue for the fourth and fifth arms of governance – the Media and the Public Services.

In all democratic systems, these separate and different powers of governance are by design kept independent and distinct so that there will not be abuse of power and authority. he Legislature makes laws, the Executive implements or executes the law and the Judiciary reviews and interprets the application of the laws.

As Lord Acton cautioned, \”Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely\”. Therefore, all democracies try their best to separate and differentiate the powers so that there is a system of check and balances. Malaysia is no different.

\"\"

At inception, Malaysia observed the separation of powers between the three functions more accurately, dutifully and respectfully. But over the years of Barisan Nasional (BN) rule, the government has become arrogant, slowly but surely exerting almost absolute control of both the Legislature (that is why it wants a two-thirds majority with no independence, free speech or vote of conscience) and the Executive (that is why 70 percent of cabinet portfolios are in Umno Baru hands).

Now, it has become obvious – as suspected since the judicial crisis of 1988 – the Executive has also taken full control of the Judiciary. In fact, according to the former real Law Minister Rais Yatim, the rise of the Executive or Presidential State has arrived in Malaysia. His doctoral hypothesis – which he now denies (so much for integrity) – has been proved by the contents of the video clip.

We are today a Presidential State with the prime minister having almost absolute control of all things including the Umno Baru claim – he has absolute control over even the constitutional monarch. Ask the so-called law minister.

How have we reached such a state of affairs? I think it is simply the full realisation of Lord Acton\’s warning about absolute power, absolute control and absolute corruption.

Total rot

When government controlling officers take orders from their Umno Baru minister and ignore the Parliament in terms of budget allocation and expenditure, I believe that the political and financial rot is complete.

When senior government officers go to the press to defend Umno Baru\’s privatisation programmes which did not have cabinet approval, the arrogance of the public service delivery system is also complete. It has become a mere extension of the political party in authority – Umno Baru.

The Auditor-General recently highlighted cases respectively involving the secretary-general of sports and culture, and the deputy director-general of the Road Transport Department.

The real question that the Public Accounts Committee and Auditor-General should ask is: Where did these two public servants get the authority to implement their programmes, if not from Parliament or the cabinet? Umno Baru?

What has happened to the government\’s Treasury Instructions and the Financial Procedures Act? Who has final authority to spend monies or privatise government assets?

As Citizen Nades correctly asked at the launch of the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index, are these laws still in place and if so, why is everybody closing an eye to them?

In earlier days, the relevant civil servants would have be charged and punished by the department or treasury head. Why is this not being done today? Have our laws changed? Or is the de facto law minister also responsible for the \’close one eye\’ culture on matters of law?

It is said that, in the country of the blind, the one-eyed is king. How true, but before our so-called law minister believes this to be so, let him be forewarned that more than 2,000 lawyers have already marched to say that they can see with both eyes and that they are not color-blind when it comes of issues of justice.

\"\"

Sorry Mr Prime Minister, but you have a real crisis in your hands! Please do not listen to your so-called law minister or in any Umno Baru logic. As you promised your late mother and the nation, you are sworn to stand for integrity as the cornerstone of your agenda. That should not be an Umno Baru agenda.

I believe that the King and the Council of Rulers have enough constitutional authority to dismiss the current government and request that a general election be called to test BN popularity on the basis of integrity alone. That is well within the monarch\’s authority based on the Federal Constitution.

I would like to urge Malaysians who feel that enough is enough to sign the petition being promoted by the People\’s Parliament. It is addressed to the King and states that the people have had enough of governmental arrogance and insensitivity to their own issues by their own espoused theory of integrity.

As lawyer Harris Ibrahim notes, we should not be afraid to give our identity card number.

Lawyers have marched and it will begin to make a difference for the sake of our children and their children. God bless Malaysia.