LETTER | Can Zahid’s moves to remain as Umno president be justified?

LETTER | With BN handing in its worst electoral performance ever in GE15, its chairperson Ahmad Zahid Hamidi has been on the cusp.

Many from the grassroots called for his resignation, while polarisation within Umno from the elite level turned more severe.

Former prime minister Ismail Sabri Yaakob has openly declared his stance against Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, and so did former defence minister Hishammuddin Hussein.

They only stay in Umno without openly challenging Zahid because he is still the president, which means, they could lose their membership if they initiate any challenge toward his hegemony.

Ironically, Zahid became instrumental in the formation of the unity government. Anwar granted him the deputy prime minister post to utilise his power as Umno president to control the nationalist party, in turn, stabilising his power.

This makes the upcoming Umno party election crucial to determine the future of the unity government led by Pakatan Harapan (Harapan).

Umno secretary-general Ahmad Maslan confirmed on Dec 9 that former Ketereh MP Annuar Musa was sacked from Umno, without elaborating the reasons behind the move.

It can be seen as a move by Zahid to shun critical voices within the party, particularly Ismail Sabri’s faction that favours working with Perikatan Nasional (PN) - which is against Zahid’s interest.

The removal of this former Umno warlord could warn Ismail Sabri and his faction to stay obedient to Zahid, or they would also risk losing their membership.

There are also media reports alleging that Zahid is planning to alter Umno’s party election system to not allow the grassroots members to vote for the positions of president and deputy president in the upcoming party election.

This, if true, is an obvious move by Zahid to eliminate all risks of losing the Umno presidency and secure his control over the party. The position of deputy president is also included here as a backup plan by Zahid to ensure the party is managed if he is found guilty of his 47 corruption charges.

Such moves definitely violate the principle of democracy and showed the ill culture of president-dominated politics in Malaysia.

The political parties, as entities under a democratic society, should abide by the democratic principle of “government of the people, by the people, and for the people”.

Putting this into the context of Umno, elites holding key positions in the party should respect the rights of the grassroots to vote for the leaders that they support, not continuously manipulate the system to maintain power.

Such moves are no different from former prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin’s tactic to impose an emergency and shut down the Parliament just to maintain his power from being challenged by a possible motion of no confidence.

However, a dilemma arises when it comes to the macroscopic perspective of the stability of the government. If Zahid were to allow proper party elections, he would most likely lose his presidency, judging from his current standing.

If Ismail Sabri rises to power, he would most likely defect and join hands with PN, which would also bring along the East Malaysian parties which demand a larger majority in the Parliament.

So, would we want to sacrifice the stability of the government to uphold democracy within Umno?

To me, stability of the federal government always prevails against other considered factors. This is because one can only talk about principles and reformation agendas when one grabs power.

Though the road to reformation is still long and tough for Anwar, he cannot do anything if he is thrown to the opposition aisle by a backdoor government again.

In this sense, the series of Zahid’s moves to stabilise his position within Umno can be justified. Nothing now is more important than Anwar’s administration staying in power for at least one term.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.