Raison de’etre of ruling party is patronage, which of course can slip easily down the proverbial slope to corruption. However citizenry are now better informed. So they delivered message in last GE on 308 that they would reject such politics by voting in Opposition into 5 states, demolished the traditional two third parliamentary majority by sending in over 80 PR parliamentarians. It marks beginning of the end. They know they have to reinvent image, so the need for MACC and JAC and other institutions. However they cannot overcome and change 50 years of ingrained habits, so these institutions operate for show and hypocrisy becomes pervasive. It manifests in selective application of rewards and punishment in the exercise of political and government manoeuvering and power both in relation to people inside and those outside.

An example of selective application on inside people is barring Mr Likeable from contesting in party elections on charge of vote buying, albeit by agents. The problem is that sentiment amongst – and knowledge of – the grass root supporters is that nearly all the candidates are tainted by some form of “vote-buying”, and Mr Likeable has not committed any worst offence than other candidates who are manoeuvred to situation bereft of serious competition. That’s the problem is pretending hypocritically as a body to be what one is basically not. One is bound to selectively exonerate the favoured ones and use the ones outside one’s camp as scapegoats to deliver the intended message of being otherwise. This, in turn, riles supporters of those sacrificed and accelerates implosion from within. The rumblings are so serious that supreme council will need to have an emergency meeting to address rampant discontent over the party’s disciplinary panel’s selective decision to bar Mr Likeable!

Then there are pressures exerted from the outside – from Opposition and civil society. They find bountiful opportunities to criticise one’s hypocrisy and inconsistency. So one embarks on silencing the most vocal of the critics including charging a prominent lawyer for sedition of disrespecting monarch institution when one own self was responsible for ‘disrespecting’ in the sense of taking away rulers personal immunity by constitutional amendments of 1993. This is another case of selective punishment.
Therein lies the crux of the problem: a leopard trying to divest its spots but since the spots are in the DNA, and cannot be removed, it does a cosmetic paint job thinking it would get away with it based on hypocrisy and selective meting out of favours and punishment. In the end, it pleases nobody whether inside and outside. People are better informed nowadays and unlike yesteryears could spot selective application of rules, laws, favours and punishment from a mile away.

Political support stems from supporters’ perception of fair distribution of rewards and punishment from the centre of power. This is where moral legitimacy to lead is derived. The moment every exercise of power and governance is perceived constantly “selective” and “hypocritical”, then legitimacy flies out of the window and support dwindles in downward spiral, accelerating implosion from pressures within – and without.

308 signifies the idea of change from traditional ways that has come. It is hard to fight it. The dilemma and challenge is nothing done by one on the decline since 308 (for standing in the way of that idea) who is caught in a bind of trying to be what one is not, could be right, no matter how one try…

The chances of AAB staying on against his own word (albeit justified on interest of country) are zilch!

He cannot go back on his word. If he had any reservations about retiring he would not have first announced and reaffirmed it repeatedly. The pros and cons on his personal scale of weigning is more pros to retire than to stay on.

He cannot remain as PM on a vote of confidence made possible on the back of an enbloc opposition vote in his favour. It is as good as asking him to defect and join Pakatan Rakyat.

In fact it is odd that any warlord from BN could become a PM based on majority of Parliamentary support structured upon and inclusive of solid Opposition’s support. It is not an option unless a unity government is first in place. Even then AAB may not want to stay on. Retirement, less stressful activity like farming and fishing here or golfing in Perth beckon instead of having to counter opposition charges and having to tame an unruly bunch of warlords more ruthless and having a greater war chest of money than him, and aspiring to take his place.

Calling Tun Mahathir to come back as PM, no matter how unlikely, would still stand a notch better chance than AAB’s coming back!