Tuesday, March 17, 2009 saw two ‘guilty’ contenders (one for the Umno deputy president’s post and another for the president of Umno Youth) being ‘sentenced ‘ differently.

Mohd Ali Rustam was barred from contesting the Umno deputy president's post while Khairy Jamaluddin was allowed to contest the Umno Youth president’s post.

With due respect to the chairman of the Umno disciplinary board, for I know him to be honest in trying to solve a very complex, complicated and confusing situation which is money politics or abuse of powers, I find the sentencing rather odd. To my mind, does it matter whether a person steals a chicken or steals a cow? It is still theft.

Does it matter whether a rapist raped an old lady or a young girl? It is still rape. Does it matter whether a killer murdered one person or ten persons? It is still murder. Before I elaborate any further, let me put a few things straight.

Firstly, I am not an Umno member but I am a Malaysian citizen and not a ‘squatter ‘ at KLIA on transit to China or India or America. Being a Malaysian citizen, I am ‘destined’ to die here and since the president of Umno is ‘destined ‘ to be the prime minister and the deputy president of Umno is ‘destined ‘ to be the deputy prime minister of Malaysia, I have the locus standi to voice my opinions out like any Ahmad, Ah Chong and Samy.

Secondly, I am neither a supporter nor an admirer of both the abovementioned men. I could not care too hoots whoever wins, for neither of them is going to be a provider of my basic necessities.

But I am concerned about the fundamental justice, fairness and fair play of what is happening to this blessed and beloved nation. The contenders like others are playing for high stakes that will have an impact on my life, my children's lives and my grandchildren's lives.

They are not playing marbles or for some peanuts. And our lives are not peanuts to be played around with by some pretenders. They are dead serious; so are we and so am I.

Now, let get back onto the track. Since both were found ‘guilty’ of some offence – never mind whether it is stealing a chicken or stealing a cow - how could the Umno disciplinary board have meted diametrically opposite ‘sentences’?

If one is set scot-free, then the other should also be set scot-free. On the other hand, if one is barred, then the other should also be barred from contesting. Fair and square.

Just imagine the public perception. Just imagine the perception of those supporters of Ali Rustam. Won’t the public and Ali Rustam’s supporters perceive that something is cooking? Could there be a perception that the front-runner, Ali Rustam, is being stopped in his tracks so that the favourite ‘son’ could win?

This was made evident that day when the incoming president showed his ‘hand’ (he favoured this beloved ‘son’ to win). If this perception holds water, then the public and the supporters will say this is hitting below the belt. It is unjust; it is unfair. And are they right in having this perception? You bet.

To assuage this ‘loss’, the deputy prime minister assured Ali Rustam that his position as chief minister of Malacca would not be touched. Funny, isn't it? A crime is a crime is a crime.

If he was accused of a ‘serious offence’ in Umno politics, then what logic is there to let him keep his seat as CM? Was it a ‘consolation prize’ to replace the ‘second prize’? Ask yourself.

Then, the second man was given a stern warning for ‘stealing a chicken’. If it was just a ‘chicken’, then it was ‘chicken’ sentence, right? Or was there something else? What is the public perception?

Oh, yes, he is the ‘son-in-law of the PM’. ‘Give him face’. Rightly or wrongly, we do not know; but the public perception is that the scales of justice were tilted one side for him and the other way for the other person.

Yes, ‘perception’ is a dirty word. You be the judge. I have great respect for the chairperson of the Umno disciplinary board. But I do not know how the decisions were arrived at.