Do we really still need a council of elders?

QUESTION TIME | On May 11, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who was sworn in at 9.30pm a day earlier as prime minister following the May 9 elections, announced a rather abbreviated list of key cabinet ministers which included just three others besides himself - Bersatu’s Muhyiddin Yassin as home minister, DAP’s Lim Guan Eng as finance minister and Amanah’s Mohamad Sabu for defence.

Conspicuous by absence was any minister from PKR, the largest partner in the new ruling coalition with 48 seats, compared to 42 for DAP, 13 for Mahathir’s Bersatu and 11 for Amanah, indicating a schism already developing between Mahathir and PKR.

It will be two days later and after a meeting between Mahathir and de facto PKR leader Anwar Ibrahim before the latter’s wife, Wan Azizah Ismail was picked as deputy prime minister.

Simultaneously, Mahathir announced a council of elders, which came to be known formally as the Council of Eminent Persons, headed by his old friend, the rather controversial former finance minister and Umno treasurer Daim Zainuddin.

It included as its members business tycoon Robert Kuok, former Bank Negara Malaysia governor Zeti Akhtar Aziz, former Petronas CEO Hassan Merican and prominent economist Jomo Sundaram.

That sequence of events indicated that Mahathir was prepared to go it alone if he had to and the appointment of the council of elders probably came as surprise to the other parties in the Pakatan Harapan coalition, especially PKR who was already unhappy with losing the finance ministry to DAP on top of not being consulted.

Now here was a Jedi-like council which was going to hear representations from others and make recommendations. In Mahathir’s words at the press conference, these people (the council) will study a lot of things submitted to them from (events dating back to) 2009 until now because “we want to take action if necessary as quickly as possible. One thing we think is very important is the Ministry of Finance and Defence - we need to have them focus on that, and later Home Affairs have to be advised on what they need to know. That is the decision we have reached this evening.”

Two days after the elections and in the euphoria of the moment after ousting a kleptocracy, very few voiced any reservations and many welcomed the appointment of the council. But on further reflection, is such a council necessary? Or desirable even? Let’s see.

One major concern about the council of elders is Daim himself and his past. Before Bersatu’s formation and entry into Harapan, Anwar had singled out Daim as one of the leaders who may be corrupt. In a recent interview after Daim’s appointment as head of the council, Anwar had this to say:

“He can contribute […] He must be aware that people are also expressing deep consternation that he has not been able to explain some of the major excesses of the past […] To me if you want to talk about democratic accountability, it must not stop at Najib […] although it does not extend to endless witch hunts.

“I discussed this with Guan Eng also, [...] he (Daim) can assist, (but) there are major issues we have to address. He can contribute, I am not saying he should not. But he should be reminded and mindful […],” said Anwar.

Daim, however, in a reply at a press conference, said that “young fellows” were pushing Anwar. “I have met Anwar a couple of times. Anwar is a very polished politician, he knows the ground very well, he knew what the manifesto was.

'[…] Pakatan Harapan offered Tun M as the prime minister for two years [… ] you have to honour the manifesto […] when you sell Tun M as the seventh prime minister you must honour that […] but the young fellows are in a hurry,” he said.

Not everyone happy

Clearly, not everyone was happy with Daim’s appointment as the head of the council of elders. Insiders say that while there are others in the council, all of whom have credentials, Daim does not listen sufficiently to alternative views. Thus, it may be possible that the final recommendations made would be vetted and diluted by Daim.

Also, committees have been set up under the council of elders to study things such as institutional reform and 1MDB but these reports have to be submitted to the council of elders and not directly to the prime minister or the cabinet, giving excessive power to this council and to Daim who heads it.

Quite alarmingly, the council appears to have forced the resignation of some people through intense questioning and questionable methods, contributing to a sort of witch-hunt under which people are made to feel that they must resign.

Apart from the resignation of Bank Negara governor Muhammad Ibrahim, the most prominent example of this was when Daim was alleged to have forced the country’s two top judges, Chief Justice Mohd Raus Sharif and Court of Appeal president Justice Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin to quit.

According to a report in Malaysiakini, former Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram claimed it was "an open secret" that this occurred during a meeting at Daim's private office. Sri Ram said Daim, who is also a lawyer, should not have demanded Raus' and Zulkefli's resignations, adding it was unconstitutional for anyone other than the prime minister to summon the head of the judiciary.

"Daim is not the prime minister and even if he had been asked by the prime minister to do what he did, he should have declined and left it to the attorney-general, the prime minister and the cabinet to handle it.

"After all, we do not want to return to the old days when there was no respect for the separation of powers and the due observance of constitutional requirements," Sri Ram said.

One wonders what was it that Daim said to obtain their prompt resignations when other calls before that for them to resign went unheeded.

Perhaps the most important question to ask is why have this council in the first place when a new government has been elected? The right thing to have done is to have appointed the cabinet as soon as possible, form committees in the various ministries to study issues, co-opt external experts as necessary and use civil servants who know the ground after many years of experience.

The reports can then be presented to the cabinet for discussion, further input and final approval. That way, ministers become fully responsible for their ministries and if these ministers are appointed with some wisdom and due consideration for their abilities, there is no reason why they can’t do a better job than a council of elders which may have tainted members.

Also, these ministers are eager to work, fresh, and many of them experienced. Barring at most three, the rest are untainted by previous hints of corruption or abuse of power.

In any case, that is what one would expect in a functioning democracy. The so-called council of elders is therefore unnecessary and ultimately it is a body that bypasses the role of the cabinet in the decision-making process of the country, giving advice directly to the PM.

The life of this council should not go beyond the hundred days allocated to it.

---

P GUNASEGARAM has nothing against the council personally, most of whom he has great respect and admiration for and has interacted with in the past. E-mail: t.p.guna@gmail.com -Mkini