Lessons from Tun Razak: class and finesse.

The good son will try to follow the father's steps as far as possible. Or he follows in the sense by avoiding the mistakes of his father.

Tun Razak, our second PM and the father to the present had some eastern gentleman's qualities about him in his political dealings. One of the endearing qualities is his way of dismissing wayward ministers. He was magnanimous.

I believe he was a firm believer that a person's single mistake does not erase the same person's virtues completely. Guided by probably this belief, Tun Razak searched for ways to give his errant ministers exits by way of honorable discharge. The gentleman always accords others with at least some politesse, at least some modicum of respect and honor.

He was never a subscriber to heinously underhanded and supercilious means to eject his team members.

Towards the end of his life, Tun Razak was also intensely bent on ridding himself of one fatal mistake. This 'mistake' was allowing himself be surrounded by disreputable and self-serving advisors. Circa late  1975, before he went to London for what would be his final medical treatment, he stopped over at Denpasar. As many of you know, Denpasar was to be the venue of the first Asean Summit or something. To his last days, Tun Razak wanted to ensure everything was in order.

In one of his relaxed and reflective moments during that time in Denpasar, Tun Razak lamented aloud that he needed help to get rid of 'communists' around him. These people are in control of the country. That was probably one of the darkest periods in the life of Tun Razak. Some people surrounding him had crippling control over Tun Razak.

There are some lessons here for our current PM. It is his prerogative to dismiss and end the services of his minister. But he must do this in the manner Tun Razak would have handled the situation.

As PM he and he alone must do the unpleasant duty. He must not and never allow himself to be ruled and influenced by extraneous factors. While there may be a need to end the services of any of his ministers, he must also address himself to the humanely principle that a person's one fatal mistake need not completely erase one's virtues.

The person concerned may indeed be despicable and deserved to be dismissed. But let him go with a least some residue of self-honor intact.

A potential storm in brewing in the case of a senior minister alleged to have raped or had sex with his Indonesian maid. The incident, it is said occurred 3 years ago. The maid sent documents or some form of documentary evidence to the US embassy and other embassies. The matter was brought to the attention of the PM of Malaysia then.

To me this is not an issue whether Pak Lah concealed the incident or not. For all we know, Pak Lah as the PM then may have concealed a whole lot of other things. He may have kept quiet even on issues that were detrimental to him personally.

The issue here is how to conduct oneself with class and finesse.

If this minister is guilty of such gross indiscretions, the PM must dismiss him on grounds that the latter's dismissal is made on the PM's absolute prerogative. The PM must never be seen as being railroaded in making that decision or he must never been seen as complicit in a conspiracy to 'assassinate' a member of his team.

It is most unfortunate, that word on the ground is offering the storyline that the PM has somehow given his permission to leak to the public, about this particular minister's indiscretions. If the PM knows of this breach of discretion, he must decide on the basis that it's his prerogative to dismiss. He need not resort or countenance underhanded tactics.

That brings us to the dark underworld of self-serving advisors. Tun Razak made that mistake and he wasn't able to control it. In a way, his demise solved the problem for him. But our current PM will want to stay around longer and that will depend on his ability to never allow himself be corralled by self-serving advisors.

The danger of being cocooned by self-serving advisors is the control these people have over what gets to the PM's attention. What passes to the PM's attention may only be what the advisors deemed to be of profit to themselves.

Here and now, the PM cannot afford to be fed with one way traffic kind of information. In this age of internet supremacy where information is no longer the power tool for a small group, the PM must be opened to all means of information. Even those from his advisors must be treated with circumspect.