Two years at most for Dr M to hand over duties
COMMENT | Before getting into any heated debate, we must talk about what we do know for sure.
What was agreed on, reported many times and expected by many, is that there will be a transition of power from Dr Mahathir Mohamad to Anwar Ibrahim before the end of the 15th general election. This is a ...
COMMENT | Before getting into any heated debate, we must talk about what we do know for sure.
What was agreed on, reported many times and expected by many, is that there will be a transition of power from Dr Mahathir Mohamad to Anwar Ibrahim before the end of the 15th general election. This is a positive statement (what it is) and not a normative one (what it should be).
Any attempt to dismiss the existence of an agreement for transition before GE15 is either deceptive or disingenuous. They can still debate it, of course, but it must start from the position of admitting that you are reneging on a promise and whether there is an overwhelming justification to argue for reneging on the promise.
That is why Bersatu’s suggestion of lengthening the prime ministerial term of Mahathir till the end of GE14 must be preceded by the admittance of reneging on the promise of the transition.
If you want to bring up something that is already set in stone, you must also provide a very good justification to do so. The only semi-normative situation is on the timing of the transition. In everyone’s mind, it is two years.
Two years was arbitrary, but it was certain. The Pakatan Harapan coalition assumed that their first choice for prime minister, Anwar, would need two years before his full pardon could be granted, processed and fulfilled.
This was an estimation because the circumstances at that time were exceptional and unprecedented. We never had a situation like that in Malaysia and case studies around the world were scarce.
Also, two years was a good time frame for housekeeping to take place. Although most people are sensible enough to know that Malaysia cannot reclaim its glory days in two years, we do know that two years is enough time to lay the right foundations and steer the country in the right direction.
During the campaign period, the people were also told that Mahathir would only be an interim prime minister for two years. This was crucial in assuaging the angry Harpan supporters who thought that its leaders had betrayed the cause by accepting the man they have campaigned against in the past.
When many grassroots supporters were disillusioned, and cracks started to form on the ground, the “two years” promise became a key stabiliser.
Further, a two-year time period is good for certainty.
The vagaries of politics had often presented numerous threats and distress to outside investors who wanted to inject some funds into the country. Many investors are holding off or diverting their funds elsewhere before the transition materialises.
Without knowing when that day of transition is, they are more in favour of adopting a wait-and-see attitude, which further dampens consumer confidence, domestically and internationally.
A simple point
That is why I’m in favour of a clear and definitive term of transition - two years. This is historically founded because the promise was used as a tool for calm and victory; this is firmly principled in keeping a promise made to the coalition and the public.
This is also distinctly savvy in instilling significant certainty in a climate of uncertainty.
I am willing to accept any differing view on what the ideal term limit should be as long as it takes into account the factual background surrounding this promise. After all, this is the only semi-normative statement here.
I am willing to listen to views that suggest why one year, one-and-a-half years, two years, two-and-a-half years or three years makes sense as long as they are founded on good reasons sufficient to rebut my reasons.
However, to take a step back and to argue against the promise of a transition in the first place is highly misplaced.
To suggest that there was no such promise in the first place is to deliberately ignore the historical context of Harapan’s negotiations and decisions, and it speaks of deception against the people involved in the negotiations and against the common people whose lives depend on the politicians solving this well.
To suggest that the promise of transition should be altered because Mahathir had led Harapan ro the historic May 9 victory is once again deceptive.
This is because the entire premise of the promise of transition is based on the idea that Mahathir was to lead Harapan into GE14 and upon victory, Mahathir shall assume the prime ministership before handing it over to Anwar.
That is the basis for the collaboration between Harapan and Mahathir. In fact, the promise of transition was a quid pro quo for allowing Mahathir to lead the Harapan coalition in GE14.
The fact that Mahathir eventually led Harapan to victory does not change this promise; it is the basis of the promise itself. No transition without a Mahathir-led victory; a Mahathir-led victory triggers the transition promise.
My point is simple - some things are certain and some things are debatable. What is certain is that there shall be a transition of power from Mahathir to Anwar by the end of the GE14 term.
What is still slightly debatable is the timeline. I am of the opinion that there is sufficient evidence to make the timeline issue also certain, not least in a written agreement signed by all component parties.
But even if I’m wrong and the timeline issue turns out to be uncertain, I argue that it is highly desirable to have a two-year timeline.
The people cannot take any more politicking. Give us what you have promised and stop playing games.
JAMES CHAI works at a law firm. His voyage in life is made less lonely with a family of deep love, friends of good humour and teachers of selfless giving. This affirms his conviction in the common good of people: the better angels of our nature. E-mail him at jameschai.mpuk@gmail.com
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.
