'Character, conscience, courage and condonation'

I have often wondered why ‘good people’ who belief in integrity and character often lack the courage to take a stand on glaring issues and concerns of the day and resign on the basis of principle.

There are many good ‘believers’ in the cabinet of Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, but what is the value of their beliefs if they keep on condoning with silence on that is irrational that happening in the nation?

They must be assured that no one dies by taking a stand and leaving the cabinet. Two have done so. Or rather, been thrown out.

Malaysians are looking for leaders who are people with integrity and commitment to principles. Belief alone does not change the price of cheese. Taking a stand, speaking out and paying a price are the models that inspire people. Conduct and behaviour are the ultimate expressions of belief.

For otherwise, what is the use of beliefs that do not inspire us into taking a stand, making a decision or taking relevant actions? As Edmund Burke so rightly said, “It is enough for good men to remain silent for evil to triumph.” We must stake our stand and position.

Character is illuminated by elements of courage and conscience. Very often, courage is negated by fear, loss of a job and perhaps the question of what others would think. These are real concerns.

Conscience is the inner compass

Conscience, meanwhile is the inner compass, and many are challenged by the realities they face. Eventually, the strength of one’s conscience, together with courage, ultimately dictates the response.

While I appreciate the clarity of ministers Mustapa Mohamed and Abdul Wahid Omar, Pemandu CEO Idris Jala and Bank Negara governor Zeti Akhtar Aziz on the recent happenings in the nation, they represent personalities whom we look up to for leadership.

They seem to give the impression that things are not too bad for them to take an unequivocal stand on the crisis of credibility that the nation is now facing.

By their very presence, together with Paul Low, they diminish themselves by seeming to condone all that is happening. In the case of Paul Low, he seems to have much to lose by speaking out candidly. So he opts mainly for silence.

Heading the cause of transparency, integrity and human rights, Paul Low embarrasses himself greatly in the present context. Perceptions vary, but the expectations are there. He was inducted into the cabinet because of his experience in these areas. We do not see him as a politician and so expect him to draw the line, stake a stand and risk all for what is right.

We now have a retired judge who candidly says that his promotion was hampered by none other than Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak. Yet, we lie about separation of powers as integral to our democracy. What is right is a transcendental notion independent of politics and party issues.

Finally, it is about justice, fairness and respect for all. We need a cabinet of conscience that speaks out for the nation. How can we tolerate gerrymandering and the bias of the Election Commission? It is a fact that we have free but unfair elections, which is why our representation is skewed.

Our wayward politicians are made to look good by the presence of some of these “credible” personalities who are silent on key issues and challenges. They seem to be interested in transforming the status quo with claims that do not resonate with the realities on the ground.

They do so by their silence, while the discredited leaders and their cronies keep spinning stories. People of character must exhibit both faith and the courage to take a stand and clarify expectations. Otherwise, with all the training and leadership that such personalities have experienced, they remain at best good people who are perceived as good for nothing.

Perhaps they either like their positions, the power this gives or even, the lure for more titles silences them.

Window dressing for our democracy

At a time when the nation needs leadership and clarity, it can be inferred that the continuing presence of such individuals condones, to some measure, all the wrong that is happening. They provide the necessary window dressing for our democracy.

These are people who need not fear any economic challenges, the loss of a job or fear taking a stand. At best, they remain apologists for the wrongs being done and indirectly give strength to the wrongdoers. They, like many, lack the will and courage that makes faith meaningful.

The credibility of the PM is at an all-time low and the nation’s international reputation is daily getting a bashing. How long is this going to continue, and at what cost? Will such leaders remain mere ringside observers or take initiatives to make a difference?

When such personalities do not establish a benchmark, like the coach who resigned when Malaysian got a ‘10-0’ thrashing in football, then what does this say about our leadership culture?

What is not acceptable in the corporate world seems to be rationalised and acceptable in politics.

While I am not a supporter of ‘Hindraf’, I do respect P Waythamoorthy for resigning as a deputy minister when promises made were not honoured. He realised that Najib’s promises were like ‘pie cakes’ made to be broken.

Waytha’s inner substance revealed itself and he opted for credibility.

We get the leaders we deserve. However, at times of crisis, we need to see people speaking out and challenging those in power and reminding them about boundaries that should at all times be respected. What is the use of claiming that one is a good Buddhist, Christian, Hindu or Muslim when these are reduced to mere labels?

If faith does not inspire an individual to nurture his life and his conscience, give meaning to his existence, then of what value is it? Perhaps such leaders do so but evidence shows that many sadly lack the will and courage to take a stand for what they believe is right. Even Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah (Ku Li) seems to have lost his sense of ‘semangat’.

For the sake of our future, we need good and responsible individuals to provide a stake for our future generations. Their leadership can make a difference, provided they are ready to sacrifice, stop rationalising and by example, bridge the belief practice gap

So, why talk about business ethics, corporate ethics, codes of conduct, transparency, integrity, and even train certified integrity officers if these ideas are not exemplified in and shared through the lived-out experiences of the people?

Can we count on them? Or will the nation be disillusioned because our expectations are just too high? -Mkini