Being fair when bashing Ahmad Bashah

The events of the past two weeks rendered the Malay "honorific title" that follows Kedah in its official full name, a little less apt than usual. The state of political flux in which the Kedah government was thrown into made it more "Darul Krisis" than a Darul Aman.

The imbroglio started with a press conference called by the then Kedah menteri besar’s state Umno deputy, throwing what appeared to be an internal petty rivalry smack into the limelight, dragging the state government, palace and party along with it.

Datuk Seri Ahmad Bashah Md Hanipah had rallied the support of 14 of the state’s Umno division chiefs and party wing leaders, demanding the removal of Datuk Seri Mukhriz Mohamad as the menteri besar – the latter being the scion of former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Among the reasons widely cited was Mukhriz’s inability to work with Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

Many current Umno leaders have chosen to stick with Najib, despite the many allegations against him by various parties, including foreign governments and respected international organisations.

These leaders often quote the lack of believable evidence and the importance of being loyal to the party president.

The irony, of course, is not lost on Malaysians, who quickly picked up on the seemingly blatant disconnect in both logic and principle as applied by the Umno leadership.

On one hand, while "evidence" has been presented by Umno members themselves against the prime minister, other members chose to still believe in him. On the other hand, there is not much evidence, at least not to the public, as to why and how Mukhriz was derelict in his duties as menteri besar (on the contrary, he seemed to be a popular menteri besar), yet the move to remove him was still seen through and, eventually, a new MB was appointed.

Given the backdrop in which the transition occurred, it is not hard to understand why there exists some public sentiment against the new mentri besar.

Even before his installation, images appeared online of him dozing off during the Sultan’s birthday investiture ceremony.

A few other choice criticisms of him ensued, the most publicised of which pointed to his academic credentials. Critics went to town with some saying he completed only MCE (as the Form 5 government examinations used to be known, before it was called "SPM"), while others said that he left school after his LCE (Form 3, SRP) examinations.

Is education a valid criticism though? Is a person’s academic qualifications, or lack thereof, the sole or primary determining factor of his or her ability to lead a state government?

We have well-known PhD holders in Malaysia who, among others, openly deny the Holocaust, form obedience clubs for wives, and vulgarly mock the sexual preferences of certain political commentators just because they disagree.

Conversely, Mukhriz's immediate predecessor in the Kedah MB post, the late Datuk Seri  Azizan Abdul Razak of PAS, who was widely criticised as a weak and rather ineffective leader, qualified with not one, but two law degrees – one from a prestigious Egyptian university and the other from a well-known British university.

Many of our early leaders did not even have an MCE certificate (or Senior Cambridge, as the prior equivalent qualification was known) while in recent history, Tun Ghafar Baba, our former deputy prime minister was no university graduate.

Intelligence does not necessitate you to hold a piece of paper, as demonstrated by people who revolutionised the way we use IT or communicate.

Getting back to Ahmad Bashah, his academic qualification did not seem to perturb critics in his long political career as state assemblyman, state executive councillor, federal senator or even a deputy minister (in the Domestic Trade Ministry, no less).

Still, while education may not be a fair point to question him, other criticisms of Ahmad Bashah, however, seem more valid, including his part in the coup which started in the middle of the Kedah Sultan’s birthday celebrations, or his inability to stay awake for state functions even after the investiture, or even his own installation, or his double standard in choosing to apply loyalty to his national leader but not his state leader.

One could even question his political credentials and achievements in the community aside from his performance as an elected representative.

More so, one should also question the system that allows a person with the current MB’s qualifications to occupy a ministerial seat, but not qualify for, say, a Pegawai Urus Tadbir N41 interview to work for the same MB. – February 9, 2016.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer, organisation or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider.