Why the authorities are taking so long to investigate various allegations?

It is because all powers are concentrated in the Executive (the government).

The one who does wrong, the one who investigates the wrong, and the one who adjudicates and determines whether a wrong has been done and what to do about it all belong to same class and group between whom there is an implicit understanding to protect one another from having account for what everyone else within that favoured group does. One canot prise open another’s closet to look at the skeletons when one also has skeletons in one’s cupboards.

Abuse of power within ruling class will be perpetrated and cannot be checked if there were no checks and balances and separations of powers.

The only party that could demand accountability is the ordinary people, vigilant of their rights and expressing their will through the ballot box.

For that the rakyat must have shared norms – shared norms of what is acceptable standards of governance and what is not.

Being a multiracial, multicultural, multireligious and polyglot society, we have more differences that divide than shared norms that unite for collective action to dislodge those who abuse power.

What Loh wrote in second para of his posting Today at 18: 56.56 has direct reference. He said, “…. It cannot be claimed that these delegates attending the GA nest march are not well informed about the allegations, or that they accepted the assurance by AAB that Najib was a good man. They are selecting Najib for the reasons best known to the delegates. What is clear is the core values they like to see in their leader are different from what ordinary citizens in Malaysia or the world over would consider important and prerequisite of their leaders…….”

I am not to sure on the part that “ordinary citizens” have the same views.

Until all sectors of rakyat could forge sufficient shared norms on values like separation of powers, accountability etc to form the critical mass to take collective to evict substandard politicians, the kind of misfeasances raised in this thread will perennially recur, complained against and nothing could be done much about them.

If tomorrow all society activists NGOs and Opposition leaders are rounded up and detained under ISA, will there be sufficient shared norms culminating in common outrage for majority to take to the streets and confront the government’s force?

Likely no.

Reponding to what wanderer posted 21:22.45 –

By Article 122B (1) of our constitution, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong would appoint Zaki Tun Azmi as Chief Justice on advice of PM. What could the King or us do? Its in the Federal Constitution!

Now PM is prepared to even resign for UMNO’s interest and unity, so what’s his problem in recommending Zaki, who was UMNO’s lawyer and served on Umno’s Disciplinary Board Appeal? You expect he would appoint the top judge from the ranks against or indifferent to UMNO???

In common law tradition, the ideal is that Judiciary must not only be independent but also “seen” independent.

We were not happy with a long line of preceding Chief Justices beginning with Tun Hamid, Tun Eusoffe Chin and then Tun Ahmad Fairuz along with disclosures in the Lingam Video Clip.

Now none of them was an UMNO lawyer before! So?

Many of us were also skeptical about Dato Zaid Ibrahim being appointed minister in charge of judicial reforms. He was UMNO’s lawyer too, benefitting in early legal career from much of UMNO’s related privatisation contracts during Dr Mahathir’s era but today he proves some independence of thought and we’re full of praises.

People can change. Of course one may say appointment to Minister is not like appointment to top post for judiciary (inedpendence of judiciary and all that) but since when we have ever had a totally independent judiciary to the extent of not only independent but also seen independent? Are we kidding ourselves?

First of all, Malaysia is not the UK. We have to revise our expectations several notches downwards in this respect.

But even in UK the top judge – the Lord Chancellor – is appointed by Queen on the advice of also the Executive/Prime Minister and worse than here is both a senior cabinet minister as well as head of the judiciary charged with appointing judges and sitting as a judge himself! So where is the perceived political independence from the Executive/PM/government even in the UK if you judge from the appointment mechanism? At least here our CJ is not cabinet minister (though our AG is)!

Now the other bastion of Separation of Powers – the US – even there I believe Supreme Court Judges are appointed by the President though by way of greater check and balance Congress must approve. If we had that check and balance here in that Parliament must approve CJ’s appointment, would it be any different if the ruling government had parliamentary majority? YB Kit may object, but Parliament will by majority endorse….

Typo correction in bold capitals – “if they’re freedom loving AND hold dear the sense of fair play, so will their judges be, a mirror of the norms of the larger society…..”

///It is said that the people deserve the leaders they elect. In the case of Malaysia, only two thousands persons select the PM, and the others should suffer silently/// – Loh.

Don’t forget : there were people in hundreds of thousands selecting as well that two thousands persons. :)

Loh, once you say “the testerone level could not be subject to conscious control because it is the DNA that decides to propogate”, you’re talking along science or pseudo-science of evolutionary biology (ala Darwin) which the Religious world over are uneasy and won’t readily accept. But biology, as you said, works on the sub-conscious that teachings, moral and religious, acting as “filters” cannot entirely suppress. Hence we hear so much of the consequences of repression of the natural biological instinct in cases of clergy men of cloth engaging in child sexual abuse and the antics of men from Middle Eastern societies once their planes take off from their place. The greater the repression the greater the hypocrisy, as happening more and more here with greater sexual conservatism instead of openness. :)