When the protector is the problem

From Walter Sandosam

“Padi harap pagar, pagar makan padi” is an oft quoted Malay proverb. It has been redefined by some linguists to read as “Padi harap pegar, pegar makan padi”.

The logic is that the ‘pagar’ (gate) being inanimate cannot makan (eat) the padi (unharvested rice), hence it lacks merit

‘Pegar’, on the other hand, is a bird species that attacks predators who may devour the padi, thus destroying the crop. It is sad when the ‘pegar’ eats the padi.

Either way, the essence of the proverb is that the person or institution whom one expects or trusts to look after society’s best interests, in certain instances, exhibits behaviour that gives the impression that it is working in the opposite direction.

This translates as failing to provide the protection as hoped for, and the issue of trust deficit consequently emerges.

This may be the scenario that has precipitated public scepticism over recent statements by the authorities and those holding public office.

Regulators and enforcement agencies are charged with ensuring that there is order in the market. This is done through the legal framework which bestows investigative powers to ensure that abusers of the law are taken to task.

Compromise on this and the law of the jungle prevails.

It is, therefore, perplexing when investigators do not provide detailed reasoning for their findings on any matter being investigated.

What is even more perplexing is that the authority that has initiated an investigation into possible breaches of the law is itself being investigated by the same body which it is investigating.

The paucity of the findings opens itself to speculation as to its robustness and unlocks the door to second-guessing as to whether there was any shadow play in the background. This is further compounded by follow-up clarifications which, unfortunately, reflect the lack of thought that had gone into the first pronouncement.

Such a situation is most unhealthy as it casts a pall of doubt which may be completely unfounded but appears possible in the scenario currently being played out. How sad when public scepticism is the order of the day.

In this context, any investigation should have been outsourced to a third party so as to maintain professionalism and neutralise any hint of possible bias.

As a nation, we can only look down in shame on the failings of some of our public institutions which are tasked with looking after the interests of the citizens at large and not some select self-interest groups with possibly dubious motives.

Moral authority once lost is most difficult to get back.- FMT

Walter Sandosam is an FMT reader.

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.