I walked out from Dewan Teratai in Shah Alam with mixed feelings. If anything, the words that I had just heard earlier really made me wonder whether we are really on our way towards the political maturity we claim to be heading to.

Over and over again, we see this sort of thing happening - once when Anwar Ibrahim was kicked out of office, and now when Abdul Khalid Ibrahim is expelled from Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR). Reflecting on what was said, I certainly wonder whether PKR is really that different, new, ‘changed’ as opposed to the party they are bashing; the party they demonise so bad for its malpractice, unfair treatment and incoherence.

In Khalid’s case, the facts are obvious. Here is a guy, who has lost the confidence of the party he served, reluctant to let go of the post he is in. Such is the situation Malaysians, especially Selangorians are aware of.

Following his reluctance, various strategies are devised to remove him from the chief minister’s office. Starting from the Kajang Move to the speech I just recently heard, one thing is evident; PKR really went all out to get this guy out of their sight, using the very method they used against Umno - bashing, showcase of malpractice and character assassination.

What is not told however, is the fact that the person they are bashing now is the same person who has went over and beyond to fulfil his duties as the menteri besar of Selangor.

This may seem like long ago, but Khalid is the guy responsible of bringing Selangor back to its heydays. From effectively administering the state’s budget (Selangor has an existing surplus in its budget) to the one month raya bonus received by state officials, Khalid has really brought a new breath of development over the state recognised as being the richest in Malaysia.

Sadly however, not even a word of that was mentioned by PKR director of strategy Rafizi Ramli, secretary-general Saifuddin Nasution, or president Wan Azizah Wan Ismail when they took to the stage in Dewan Teratai. Instead, what the audience (including me) was fed with is how bad the guy is, starting from his court case to his handling of Selangor.

Not even a flash of familiarity was shown in the faces of these senior politicians. Khalid is no longer referred to as a successful person, party member, a leader who has managed to propel the name of Pakatan Rakyat in the eyes of the citizen, but as an enemy, a persona not worthy of recognition. “Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim”, the name was uttered with such negativity you would think that he represents a rival party instead of PKR.

An outsider to both Pakatan and BN

As a person, Khalid is not perfect; he is not devoid of the weaknesses we human have. There are cases where he might have taken an unorthodox approach to, and since he is a high-profile politician, it is just normal for him to enter a court or two (Malaysian politics involve a lot of lawsuits, mind you).

Such is expected, but where he differs, he’s actually one of the (very) few Malay politicians from the side of Pakatan who has really managed to achieve something for the area under his administration. But even having said that, the fact stays. He is an outsider now, to both Pakatan and BN. That fact was made clear to me by Wan Azizah, Saifuddin and Rafizi, and the same fact is what I hope to shed light to in this inferior writing of mine.

In Khalid’s case, the court proceeding between him and Bank Islam was cast into the limelight. This case, which was settled out of court on March 31 this year, was enlisted as one of the prime reasons for his disposal.

While it might sound relevant to some, to my ears, the mention of this particular case is a sign of desperation. If the court case really is one of the main reasons why the party needs to get rid of him, why bother mentioning it after it has been settled, rather than when it first started?

Another instance is the Kajang Move itself. Even if the whole intention of the move is to replace Khalid, the guy himself has publicised his desire to quit at the end of the term. Can’t it wait? If Pakatan can be vocal on the removal of a certain professor from a university’s research centre (even after the said university provided justification on its action), why is the party so defensive when it comes to removing their own (former) member?

I understand how two wrongs (assuming that the university’s action is incorrect) do not make a right, but if this is the shape the political maturity they boast so much on having, what can be seen then is that the demand for political maturity is directed more towards the opposing party and personnel rather than their own self. It stood evidence that even they are not practicing what they demand.

Other than the court and the Kajang Move, another fact that caught my attention was Rafizi’s words that the appointment of Khalid is solely due to the agreement the three parties within Pakatan Rakyat had to appoint him as the menteri besar.

More as lip service than real practice

This particular fact hurts, as it shows that even the coalition combined decision is not sustainable. And to see it happening in a present setting where political maturity is the currency, and done by the sides assumed to be possessing it could only mean one thing - the word ‘maturity’ functions more as a lip service than as a real practice.

I concede that my writing so far seems to be damaging to the Pakatan image, but even if that’s the case, I believe that it is my responsibility to spread this humble view of mine about the other side to my brothers and sisters; the people who really clings on the hope for a more mature, fair, and holistically better democracy.

We need to realise that despite our shout for a mature, two party political system to be made a reality, we forgot that for there to be any competition between the two, both parties need to have the same element - political maturity. In our case, our excessive attention dedicated by us towards one party has made us blind and oblivious to the flaw of another.

While we are demanding for the ruling government to be fair, equal and critical, we somehow forgot that the call to be more politically mature also befalls us all. Especially us, since we are the real power of this political system, the people.

As I was walking to my car after the end of the speech, I can’t help but to notice a husband and wife rushing to their motorcycle amidst the rain. From the rich to the poor, the young and old, all citizen of this blessed land have that hope for the state to move from chaos towards order, from destruction towards construction.

That hope is laid on their elected leaders, and the same hope is now endangered by the political ambition of the very people they placed their faith to. Their faces show confusion, the cluelessness that I, too, am feeling.

Are we really heading towards the political maturity we hope to see, or have we just fallen into the trap of believing another illusion to be a solution?

IKMAL HAZLAN IKMAL HISHAM is currently doing his MSc in Project Management, Finance and Risk in City University, London.