A university professor of psychology and political science (usually in the US, a university professor has two acknowledged fields of expertise) at George Washington University (GWU) studied political leaders over a 100-year period and identified the “socio-psychological profile of disabled leaders”.  

He then defined that “disability sets in when the aides in the office stop telling them the truth about the real affairs of the world around them”. I fully agree and have since found this to be true.  

When I was with Mimos, we were working hard to appoint a new and revamped council premised on a model that civil society or third sector representation was an important principle in the internetworked world of the information age.  

While we worked hard to give effect to this hypothesis, we had aides in the PM’s Office who tried to “influence our decision-making with illegitimate views of their own”. In one case, one PMO Aide tried to dissuade us from appointing Dr Chandra Muzaffar onto the council because of the fall-out between Anwar Ibrahim and the then-PM.  

To the credit of the PM though, when told about this he made no bones about it but simply went ahead and announced Dr Chandra’s ( left ) name at the press conference, although he was not even there at the first meeting, as Dr Chandra was in London then.

My GWU professor goes on to describe the many circumstances which demonstrated and evidenced the ‘disability’ definition which led to the fall of great leaders. Most directly he attributed the ‘fall’ to poor and bad advisors who stopped telling the truth after some time in office. In fact, some go even to the extent of telling lies to save the bosses but actually are helping them become ‘disabled.’  

I have called such poor and bad advisors in public service ‘idiocrats’. To recap in yet other words, idiocrats are poor advisors who do not have enough knowledge about a subject but go ahead and give their unsolicited views which then becomes public policy when operationalised.

Unsolicited ideas

Apparently that is what happened with the Christian Federation of Malaysia’s Christmas celebrations which the PM attended.

Some idiocratic aide “gave his or her unsolicited ideas about crucifixes and Christmas carols”, and then this became misinterpreted as public policy and the blame fell squarely on the Muslim brethren, only for all to be informed by The Sun that “a non-Muslim aide had consulted colleagues and initiated the directive by calling the archbishop’s office on Christmas eve” to make the specific requests.

I do not need to guess who that idiocrat might be. Regardless, the point I want to make is that all officers in PMO must take care that their words, phrases and actions are not misconstrued to come from the prime minister himself. That is why working in the PMO is a great responsibility and carries more accountability.

In fact, in my first five years in the PM’s Department, we had a boss whom we nicknamed ‘bulldog’, who always insisted that when we went on the ground to undertake any project we must report “all reality based on facts and evidence”, and not just based on opinions given. Opinions are plenty but facts and evidence define truth.  

That advice is good for all public servants; that when reports are made, please be careful to limit it to evidence and never on “opinions and feelings of unnamed public servants”.

How else could the chief secretary to the government have been misinformed about the Selangor’s constitutional convention for the state secretary to be appointed in consultation with the MB before he must take office before the MB, and not just the sultan? Again, I can only guess potentially where and how this specific mistake was made, too.

The private secretary to the sultan was really complicating matters even more by issuing his statement on behalf of the sultan to say that the state secretary is taking an oath before the head of state, who is the CEO of the state.

Precisely my point, the head of state is not the CEO and should stay out of administrative matters; as the so-called sworn loyalty is always ultimately to the sultan, but never over and above the head of the menteri besar, unless it is over a matter of principle. Even in which case, the state secretary has to leave the state service. What he needs to do before the MB is to take the oath of office and swear to maintain and sustain all state secrets.

Serious policy implications

All independent actions and motions of ordinary public servants therefore have serious policy implications for all public offices. While it is for this specific reason that junior public servants are not given too much discretion, sometimes idiocratic aides also make their own rules and create their own discretions if not well-monitored or are badly trained.

\"bersihAnother issue worth relating to the same set of concerns is the “so-called pluralism debate” that Ikim was supposed to have moderated. I have read about it only from Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad’s ( right ) blog, and I am shocked that the minister responsible for Islamic Affairs has silently supported this stand on the issue by not commenting about this misleading statement and wrong argument.  

I must declare that I am a student of Dr SH Nasr, the well-known Islamic scholar and philosopher, and I believe his stand and teaching is not inconsistent with the Islamic theology and philosophy. Dr Dzul expounded and argued an almost similar case and position.

All of the above brings me back to a question my good friend asked me over the weekend, “Is the PM serious about this 1Malaysia thingy, and is Minister Idris Jala also committed to all that he preaches?” My answer is actually reflected in my 1Malaysia column and interpretation.

Both the PM and Minister Idris Jala will fail if their “greatest enemies are within their mosquito nets.” For example, how can the Minister in the PM’s Department responsible for Islamic matters “define the dress code in the compound of a parking lot of a mosque?”  

My PM’s Department boss was therefore absolutely right, we cannot afford to have idiocrats interpreting and making their own public policy positions on issues way outside their jurisdiction. And, as I have always infamously argued, “the air we breathe is never green in colour!” Moreover, the mosque and compound, I think, are under the jurisdiction of the sultan.

The Good Lord knew what he was doing when he created air to be colourless, and therefore the idiocratic minister should not now try and paint the air in the parking lot green by his edict on the “proper dress code for lady politicians who went there for their aerobics exercises”.  

Even Tok Guru is absolutely clear and he is the chief ulama of PAS, I believe. But the Umno minister of similar functionality makes a good and true fool of himself. Idiocrats are actually worse than morons, I am told. Idiocrats know what they are doing, while fools and morons do not.

May God bless Malaysia regardless!