I refer to the Malaysiakini report Tsu Koon is new Gerakan president.

Finally, Koh Tsu Koon is returned unopposed as the president of Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia. This undivided mandate and unconditional support is like giving the president a bazooka to lead the charge.

However, I am deeply disturbed by the agnostic action of the president in nominating his supporters to key posts as this can be construed as violating the sanctity of the unqualified trust all members placed in him.

Chang Ko Youn was nominated for the post of deputy president while Teng Hock Nam, Mah Siew Keong and Dr S Vijajaratnam were nominated for the three elected vice-president's posts.

Together these four would have neatly formed a gang, a gang of four erecting a great wall of might and awe, towering over and above any other individual in the party who wishes to serve. This is not healthy democracy.

However, the latest news is that Teng has withdrawn from the contest citing that he wants to see a more multi-racial Gerakan.

Sensing something amiss, the president, defended his action by saying: ’We (referring to himself and the gang of four) have been working so closely in the central working committee that I signed for them as an indication of my appreciation’.

Unfortunately, the signature, in legal and political terms, means an endorsement of the candidates. Common sense will call it a ‘reward’. Those who work hard but far away from the president due to geographical and structural constraints, especially at the branch and division levels will have no chance for appreciation.

The state chairpersons will view it as favouritism. What about the other central working committee members? Are they irrelevant? The whole membership will view it as discrimination and denial of their equal rights in this party contest.

The president's action has unwittingly sparked off unnecessary factionalism and conflicts in the party. This is no longer the satu hati spirit.

In the Chinese press, the president expressed support for the four and at the same time asked the members to make their own decisions.

If he really respects the equal rights and entitlement of the members, why express explicit support for this gang of four? It is unnecessary. A gold plated medal is good enough to show appreciation. Why does he need a ‘great wall’ to separate himself and the whole membership?

Whoever wants to serve, it must be on their strengths and merits. Meritocracy does not allow any aspiring politician to piggyback on anybody, especially the supreme power of the president. Even exposure must be given to the other contestants. Let all candidates slog it out to prove their worth.

When the then president Dr Lim Keng Yaik and Kerk Choo Ting were challenged by Dr Goh Cheng Teik and Khor Kar Khim, Keng Yaik did not nominate Choo Ting for the post of deputy president.

If Chang Ko Youn were to win this election, he will not have won it on his own merit. So too the other three presidentially nominated vice-presidents.

‘Tongkat leaders’ are no good for the party, especially when we were almost wiped out in the last general election. Gerakan leaders must be able to hold their own and fight on their own like lions and not like hyenas.

A presidential decree of support must cover all aspiring candidates to reflect the total support of the whole membership for the president.

In this way, whoever wins or loses, the president will not be blamed. The president is always there to ensure unity and lead the charge forward.