The last month has been sheer disappointment, whenever I read the newspapers. In the midst of all the murders, suicide bombings, robberies etc, we are presented with the ongoing tussle between MIC leaders and IPF's MG Pandithan.

On the one hand, Pandithan is requesting for S Samy Vellu to step down as the president of MIC and to make way for S Subramaniam, and on the other, Samy and other MIC leaders are warning Pandithan not to continue putting his foot in his mouth.

All these, because of the statement made by former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad to veteran Barisan Nasional leaders to make way for younger leaders.

One thing Pandithan has forgotten and probably needs reminding is the fact that he has been expelled from the MIC and does not belong anywhere near the party. He seems to have joined forces with Athi Kumanan, Malaysia Nanban editorial adviser, in voicing his views.

The question here is, who cares about what Pandithan and Athi Kumanan have to say about S Samy Vellu's tenure at the helm of MIC. They do not form any part of the party.

I feel saddened reading about the state of affairs of Malaysian Indian politics. The MIC is not perfect but it does play an important role in dealing with the many woes faced by the grassroots Malaysian Indian community.

One instance that strikes my mind was the Kampung Medan incident, in which Samy was spot on and had the problems solved before it became a national problem. During that time, where was Pandithan? What was he doing? He is supposed to be the leader of IPF, another Indian political party, but his contribution, if at all, was minimal.

Pandithan is only seen in places and events frequented by the Umno leaders and this is indicative that he is more intent in pandering to them rather helping the community. Who is he then to criticise Samy?

To be able to criticise Samy, the critic must have his integrity intact. Pandithan lost his a long time back.

Pandithan should be first asked to carry out his responsibilities effectively and efficiently, as the leader of a party, which purports to strive for Indians, before he could even criticise the effectiveness of other party leaderships.

I am quite disappointed with the whole situation, as it is not going to help the Indian community in any way. These external factors should not interfere with an excellently working mechanism headed by Samy and Subramaniam.

They have been having a good working relationship of late, and this definitely is the secret behind the recent success of numerous projects run by MIC. Samy still has the strength to fight and strive for the Indians in Malaysia. So, why lose a good and capable leader?

My question to Pandithan is, what has he or his party done to try solving the socio-economic problems faced by the Indian community?

It is time for IPF to look into their political agenda and to determine if they have carried out what they have promised their members, i.e to serve the Indian community.

Sitting at the helm of a political party and receiving support from party members means nothing unless Pandithan can show that he is a leader capable of serving the community, efficiently.

Until then, Pandithan should keep sweeping his own backyard and leave the decision of a change in the MIC's leadership to the members of the MIC. To Samy, Subramaniam and all other MIC leaders carry on performing your valuable services to the community; we have faith in you and your leadership.