Even if Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) turns out to be the single largest winner of seats at the next general elections, it is widely now known that Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim will not be the favoured candidate for Prime Minister (PM).

It appears that the die has already been cast and Datuk Seri Anwar for all his personal sacrifice for the opposition is nothing more than a dispensable commodity in the pursuit of power by others within the coalition of opposition.

At a private gathering in London recently, Datuk Ambiga Sreenivasan and others present, are known to have decided unequivocally and privately that Datuk Sri Anwar Ibrahim is a liability to the cause of the coalition and therefore categorically unsuitable for the position of PM in an opposition led government.

Whilst acknowledging his treatment at the hands of government is not something for the BN to celebrate, Datuk Ambiga conceded that Datuk Seri Anwar is a spent force who could better serve their cause as an iconic figure, a symbol of all that’s wrong with the BN, but not as a national leader and certainly not as PM.

Those present at that meeting which included representatives of PKR, according to a source close to the Bersih leadership, agreed that slating Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim for the position of PM would only serve to enhance the BN’s chances of increasing its majority at the next General Elections.


This therefore begs the question: ‘What is the proposed line up of a potential PKR-DAP led government to lead the nation? Is there a shadow cabinet?  Are there shadow ministries?  And what preparations in policies do the opposition have for the public to scrutinize? What qualifications do potential ministerial candidates possess, what exceptional experience do they bring  to the equation that could justify vilification of a working government in the BN?

Before allowing a hitherto disparate group of rabble rousing, opposition, private interest groups to ascend to government from the streets,  should the public not be entitled to know before hand what experience and skill their members bring to the table to lead a country as diverse and developed as Malaysia is?

Can they govern and govern for all as is widely claimed by Bersih 2.0 the flagship of PKR and DAP?

Will there be chaos will there be order? will there be paybacks?

Will the policies of an opposition led government be one of Orwellian character with some being more equal than others as happened in the case of Singapore after the PAP took control in 1965?

Will merit be based on economic and social status, will race be a determinant as was and remains largely the case in the “meritocracy that is Singapore“? and will the constitution be changed? If so how, who will have a say? and where does PAS fit into all of this?


It is clear that the token Malay in the midst of the ‘racially and religiously diverse’ coalition of opposition parties sits an uneasy ‘alliance’ with PAS a fundamentalist Islamic party with theocratic ambitions for government.

PAS and its policies are anathema to the  American influenced pro western orchestrated and financed coalition. Lets not pretend they are anything less than loathsome to especially the DAP in opposition. Their tolerance of PAS is embarrassingly cosmetic and coming apart at the seams.

Politics certainly does make very strange bedfellows but never as strange as this. So what plans have the coalition for PAS and its religious mainly rural constituents if it does succeed in forming government at the next general elections?

Would it be unrealistic to suggest that repressive anti terrorism laws designed to jail PAS members en masse for being Muslims as a means of neutralising PAS (justified with manufactured credible intelligence from foreign intelligence agencies) would be the order of the day if PR wins? And why not?

Many within the coalition have already expressed misgivings about not just PAS but of Datuk Seri Anwar, Malays and Muslims in general and thats putting it mildly.

If as is widely speculated and discretely disclosed by Bersih’s officials in London, echoed by the DAP elsewhere, there will be swift radical changes to the federal constitution, then what are these changes to the constitution being proposed by Bersih, the DAP and PKR?

Will the Malays be subject to Chinese economic power bullying as has been the case in Singapore after 1965. Will the NEP be reversed on the pretext of a meritocracy where Malays will be relegated to second class citizens together with the Indians as was experienced in the Singapore experiment?


A second and more perplexing question is this. Where does Dr. Wan Aziz Wan Ismail stand in the midst of all of this? There are problems for her and her family with unending allegations of Datuk Seri Anwar’s philandering, charges of sodomy and graphic evidence on camera of his tryst with a prostitute for her and her daughter turned politician to deal with.

Dr. Wan Azizza is faced with a dilemma that goes directly to the heart of her morality as a leader’s wife and a Muslim (which she wears on her sleeve). Questions  about the kind of morality practiced by what is perceived as potentially a future first family of Malaysia linger.

That whilst she covers herself from head to toe in conforming Islamic code of dress and ‘stands by her man’ in preserving the family unit,  at what cost is this charade sustainable and for how long? Is this a trade off for the greater object of acquisition of great personal and political power?

Dr. Wan Azizza has a public duty to disclose to the public candidly the state of her relationship with Datuk Seri Anwar, his relationship with the rest of the family especially now following the recent revelations about his affair with a prostitute caught on camera.

Anwar and his barrage of lawyers and advisors not too shy to discuss the failings of others have gone silent since. Deafeningly silent. And the public are clamouring for information and answers but no as loudly as Bersih 2.0 does.

Political sloganeering and bare denials do not of themselves suffice to explain such a grievous moral dilemma so antithetical to everything the ‘good clean opposition’ claims a monopoly over in politics.  

Dr. Wan Azziza’s responses so far to date have been unimpressive, unconvincing and serves only to provide rich fodder for more speculation and gossip about Datuk Seri Anwar’s personal and his family’s morality.

More damaging and destructive is the reinforcement of allegations of Anwar’s deviant sexuality and his insatiable sex drive by their collective silence and the machinations of his coalition partners in his weakest and most vulnerable moments.


Datuk Seri Anwar now appears trapped in a quandary, a vice of his own making with the 3 T’s tape allegedly detailing his exploits with a prostitute.

It was Datuk Seri Anwar who himself a little over  a year ago publicly relied on a similar vice of a suspect tape of one Lingham, a lawyer supposedly engaged in a conversation over the telephone with the then Chief Justice of Malaysia, Fairuz CJ. The tape and its contents a clandestine production of a Chinese member of parliament a client and ‘friend’ of Lingham.

Datuk Seri Anwar led condemnation of the former Chief Justice at a press conference vilifying the man before any trial or hearing into the authenticity of the “Lingham tapes” or the alleged affair. His condemnation of Fairuz CJ and Lingham was vitriolic, unforgiving, relentless and undermined any proper authority of forum with the legal authority and powers to properly establish the  authenticity of the purported conversation captured in that tape between Lingham and the Chief Justice of the day Fairuz CJ.

On a separate note: The findings of the Royal Commission into the Lingham tapes affair  still baffles many academics, lawyers and jurists in the international legal community. The conclusions drawn are baffling for its on the strength of that inadmissible tape and other unsubstantiated material and evidence cobbled together to hang the former Chief Justice Fairuz in what is now commonly referred to as the Lingham  affair).

Clearly the former judges who sat at the Royal Commission had no idea of the concept and theory of Judicial independence, evidence or natural justice.

Sadly now that same blow torch is being applied by the same lynch mobs to the belly of Datuk Seri Anwar in much the same way as he applied it to Lingham and Fairuz CJ. He has no defence to such weapons of war and is in no position in fairness to cry foul over the 3 T’s tapes revealing his own sordid affair with a prostitute.


Back to the hypothesis on an alternative government however far fetched that proposition may be.

Are Datuk Ambiga and Lim Kit Siang amongst others guilty of drip feeding such valuable and damaging information on Datuk Seri Anwar to others abroad (non citizens in particular) and domestically to those who have financed their causes of disruption in Malaysia?

Does  the Malaysian public not have a right to know for instance who it is who will will constitute the make up of an opposition led government? Or is the opposition’s silence and refusal to discuss such critical issues a sample of the opposition’s idea of democracy and what the country can expect of them in government?


Critically as the cracks begin to appear within the opposition, who is it we ask that was the driving force behind the setting up of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim over the 3Ts’ tape?

What other information leaks from opposition ranks about each of its own members can we expect to learn in the coming months as bitter rivalry and aggressive jockeying for positions of power in a prospective opposition led government dominate the thinking of individuals and power brokers within the ranks of opposition parties.

What is the Malaysian Bar’s role in all of this? What does Datuk Seri Anwar have to say to all of this? is he still a fighter or has he been mortally wounded by his own friends.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s