DAP’s ham & eggs

kepala-sakit Naji


After 3 weeks away from blogging I return to see, as I had predicted, elections are yet to be called.

Hardly surprising as the prerogative for “recommending” to HM The Agong to dissolve parliament (and thus initiating fresh elections) belongs to the current PM – a legitimate process sanctioned by the Constitution, a process no different to any Westminster styled constitutional democracy – who as we know (and he too knows) hasn’t enjoyed the confidence of the majority of the people to call for one as yet. Yes, why rush to commit political suicide.



When you’re as politically as f* up as poor Najib, and you have the constitutional rights to hold off for a wee while longer, why not, as the time until the final moments will permit you to:

a. work out some salvaging policies and programs (though I don’t see any),

b. device some politically nefarious schemes, wakakaka,

c. hope the opposition will balls up through fighting among themselves or shooting themselves in their own feet (Hudud vs Secularism), 

d. etc.

Regarding subpara ‘c’ above, the DAP is currently showing its internal division over the Karpal Singh’s proposal of ‘one person, one seat only at either federal or state level’.

DAP’s loose cannon M Manoharan supports Karpal Singh’s proposal

I both agree and disagree with Karpal’s proposal.

I agree with Karpal because I opine that the DAP has grown exponentially in membership numbers where, as different from yesteryears, it now has more than adequate numbers of good and capable pollies to take on its share of state and federal seats with a different individual representative in each constituency.

If a senior DAP pollie hangs on to both a state and a federal seat, such an approach will deny and frustrate another capable party member who wants to make direct contributions as a people’s representative. Frustration among party members in politics will ensure the DAP remains a small player.

OK, some new jump-on-wagon-ers to the party, having rushed to join the party since March 2008, may not be desirable (being seen as opportunists) while some new wannabes may also be moles. The DAP is notorious in its apprehension about such a possibility (of moles) which has been why its vetting process for pre-selection candidates is as tight as Midas’ fist.

But look, there is no 100% guarantee in politics as demonstrated by the remarkable Madam Hee, who despite DAP’s over-accommodation of and for her, went on to betray the party. Win some, lose some, and preferably win more than lose … but in the end, there cannot be any watertight assurance of a party member’s indivisible party loyalty.

But being apprehensive about some dodgy members like Madam Hee or another remarkable erstwhile (former-UMNO) member in Jelutong(?) doesn’t mean there’s no one else in a great party to call upon to take up a state of federal seat to be vacated by an existing MP-ADUN. The DAP should, nay, must increase its represenatives’ gene pool.

However, I disagree with Karpal on his proposed sole exception, that Lim Guan Eng be allowed to stand at both state and federal levels. WTF for when Lim GE will again be the CM of Penang which automatically rules him out from federal ministership.

According to Article 43 of the Malaysian Constitution, ADUNs who are also MP cannot have it both ways, that is, by continuing to be ADUNs (and thus possibly MBs or CMs or State Exco members) while becoming federal ministers or deputy ministers. They have to choose between being a federal minister (or deputy minister) or an ADUN.
Thus, if Lim Guan Eng wants to continue being CM of Penang (thus has to an ADUN first), and most Penangites want him to, and I am confident he will be re-elected in the next state election to be an ADUN and consequentially the CM, then he can’t be appointed as a federal minister (assuming Pakatan takes Putrajaya), though he may be an ordinary MP.