The core issues of the general election have received a little more focused nuance with the formation of new state governments.

In the process of the identification and definition of the requisite political leadership for the three or four state governments, core and unresolved issues among the new parties in government have become obvious.

The most obvious and really visible issue has been the greater participatory role of the Sultans in the determination and appointment of the menteri besar. In four of the states, the views and concerns of the Sultans have become especially pronounced.

Do their views matter? They did not appear to have issues in the recent past under governments led by Barisan Nasional (BN). I raised this very issue of the political will to lead, calling it “an issue of leadership integrity,” in my presentation to the Parliamentary Committee on Integrity on Feb 13, 2005. Nothing happened.

This same political will to lead and provide guidance to the administration of a state towards better governance defines the tension in the choice of alternatives candidates for the leadership of each state.

Leadership integrity requires a person of impeccable character and high integrity but also one who commands a clear majority in the House of Representatives, or in the state senate. That is a constitutional principle for the selection of the person by the King or the Sultan enshrined in our written constitution.

The opaqueness of the current problems becomes highlighted because each of the Malay states had in the past been reduced to a federally-defined leadership structure within Umno. There is no formal state leadership structure in Umno; only federal ones. That had reduced the role of each state ‘formal leader’ to blind obedience and compliance with directives from headquarters.

\"\"

The Sultans are on the other hand only heads of their state. They have no federal jurisdiction except when they are appointed the King.

Interestingly, this appears to be changing. That may explain the obvious reasons why the Sultan of Selangor, the Perak Regent, and respective Sultans of Perlis and Trengganu have insisted on meeting all the collaborating parties in governance before appointing the political executive of the State. It further appears that it is no more going to be either a blind or merely ceremonial role.

The Sultan is in fact the head of state, whether in the case of the federation (as Yang DiPertuan Agong) or in states in the peninsula, except for Penang, Malacca, Sabah and Sarawak which have their own Agong-appointed head of state. Therefore, as per the federal and state constitutions, on the matter of the appointment of the leader of the party in majority, they have absolute authority to make the final decision among the qualified candidates.

I believe this is one of the clearest discretionary powers of the King or Sultan, and even in the British Constitutional history. Normally, the choice is obvious but when there is uncertainty, the Ruler becomes the final rule!

Vote for improved governance

Let me reflect further on this single core issue which has become highly pronounced in especially in Perak. Who of all the candidates would therefore command a majority in the state legislature? Was it DAP, Umno or PKR?

What are the real issues? By size of the membership and based on simple and straightforward democratic rationality, a DAP candidate should be the political head of this administrative jurisdiction. But neither DAP, Umno nor PKR had an absolute majority.

One would think that democratic rationality defines DAP’s raison d’etre and therefore their thinking. Yes, but the state constitution, based on our Rule of Law principle, also requires that a Malay-Muslim to be the MB unless the Sultan or Malay Ruler of the State dispenses with that requirement.

Our rule of law could may be have even accommodated such democratic rationality, if the DAP had been forward-looking before the elections and anticipated the capture of Perak. The Sultan could have quite easily accommodated a DAP candidate if for example, one of the candidates offered was even an ethnic Chinese or Indian but of Muslim faith. But is the faith of the MB even really the core issue?

What was the unwritten nuance and principle already accommodated within our written constitution of which this leadership crisis was really all about? We the people, who voted for the opposition or the Barisan Rakyat this time around in Perak, did so for the sake and with a hope for improved governance.

\"\"

I am sure this same improved governance is also the goal of the Sultan and the Regent of Perak. But, can we also accept that the Sultans, especially the ones in Perak, Selangor, Perlis and Trengganu are in fact may be equally aware of all the ground issues that the ordinary people spoke up and about even as they voted for and against? And, can we also accept the fact that the same Sultans fully understand the requirements of the new state government party?

And, especially so by way of knowing the BN federal government party which is currently in the opposition or by exception? Can we also accept the premise that the Malay Ruler under our federal constitution is meant to be apolitical and neutral on partisan political issues; with the exception of where the state or federal constitutions give them some explicit authority and rights?

The selection of the leader of the party with a majority” is one of those clear criteria. If all of the above is rational and logical, why cannot the DAP or even Umno accept the particular choice of the Sultan? If they do not trust the particular political leader, as reported in the mainstream media, maybe their real issue is within their own party or the nature of the coalition, and not with the Sultan of the state.

Therefore, here I agree fully with the arguments made by Raja Petra Kamaruddin in his ‘No Holds Barred’ column of the previous week, in giving the yellow card to our the very honorable Lim Kit Siang for his outburst on this issue. Thankfully this seasoned politician has also apologised for his error and reaction.

Leadership integrity

Can all of us who supported the Barisan Rakyat in the elections pause to listen and reflect on what we think of as ‘the nature of this new governance’? We were already advised, no euphoria or celebrations, because the winner never takes all! But, do we really believe that? Can we then practice that?

Now, let us also reflect for a moment, what factors would in fact have spurred the Malay Ruler, either the Regent or the Sultan himself, to do this and appoint only the right person, if not for achieving an improved governance?

\"\"

Therefore, in the euphoria of the win by the People’s Front, let all the people” (not excluding political parties and their leaders) please not forget our own political history; that Perak is one of the tanah-tanah Melayu which we read about in British and Malaysian history.

Was it not in Perak also that the British Ruler JWW Birch was murdered when he abused the rights and privileges of the Malay Sultan? I’ve taken the following excerpt from Page 37 of

the Form Five history textbook:

“The British lead by JWW Birch was opposed by the locals led by Dato’ Maharaja Lela. The revolt had the support of all the nobles and the sultan. The revolt of the locals towards the British was due to:

• The Resident failed in his duties as a Resident because he did not abide by the stipulations in the Pangkor Treaty of 1874.

• The nobles were against the collection of tax by the British instead of them as they considered that this was eroding their rights

• The nobles protested the British rule in their areas

• The nobles were unhappy with British interference in the culture and local affairs of the Malays

• Birch did not respect the social system and was not conversant in the Malay language

• Birch was killed on 2 November 1875 by Seputum, Pandak Lam and others on the orders of Dato’ Maharaja Lela in Pasir Salak.”

It is said that those who do not learn from history are condemned to see history repeat itself. Therefore, I think the conclusion below suggested by Kee Thuan Chye vide his widely circulated blog-views in rocketmail.com is pertinent: “What political parties should do now, regardless of whether they’re from BN or BR, is to work together to build the nation. That should be of utmost concern. If it means they have sometimes to join hands and do it, let that be so. That’s the hallmark of a mature democracy.”

Here maybe, we can all learn and reflect from history on what it also means to have leadership integrity in being the leaders of all Malaysians. A state or federal leader cannot only become interested in parochial or sectarians interest at the expense of all else. That is the fastest way to doom.

\"\"

The leader of a state works for the interest of everyone in the state; including non-people issues like the preservation of environment and management of state resources, and especially care for those in the minority or currently marginalised like the Orang Asli or the Tamils.

Therefore, when one is appointed by the Sultan to lead the state, it is not what they say or do not say that makes them leaders with integrity, but how they manage and lead during the stewardship of that opportunity.

I think all the leaders, and PM Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is included, should stop talking too much and start doing the right things in the right way with the right attitude. That is when the people will know and feel the difference in their particular leadership style and experience the promise of improved governance.

Although it is too early to predict, but it is my strong view that the 13th general election will offer an even more pronounced view of the nature of good governance. Especially since the people now have the opportunity to choose between two differing styles or philosophies of governance of the state.

In that regard, the case histories of Kelantan, Terengganu or Sabah governments of the past were not sufficiently instructive to offer us good lessons on state administration.

Penang, Perak, and Selangor now have an excellent opportunity to demonstrate leadership by example of good governance. May God continue to bless Malaysia’s journey to improved governance.