Another leadership tussle in PKR-this time over the position of the Sarawak Chief position-which is only a month after a re-appointment after the party poll, and within 6 month of a state election. The public who are supporters of the party would be excused to feel disappointed at such power struggle which happened behind the party’s closed doors.Who ever it is who may emerge as the winner the loser is the party because the power struggle at this juncture make little sense to the people outside. Why is the party keep making people feel that it is shooting itself in the foot? There is a view which look at human behaviour from a `system’ perspective. The point of a good system is not to stop power struggles-but to channel it to the party and the public’s benefits.
When leadership struggles happen there are many reasons-chief of which is that there are people who are dissatisfied at the present leadership. Challenging the leadership is not the only way to deal with it-it is the end of a process to debate about the issues concerned. The debate is concluded by a vote of confidence on the incumbent. That is what it should be if democracy is the only game in town. However just like the BN parties especially UMNO, the top leader of PKR actually personally choose the state chief and the major appointed position holders, along with the candidates for parliament, state and, if there are council elections, also council candidates! Practically the top leader need to know thousands of people well enough to make these important appointments on a well-considered basis. If not then the top leader will have to depend on a lot of his trusted lieutenants/`lobbyists’ to provide the information he needs on the candidates-jumping over the local members who may know much better than the top leader and his lieutenants on who make a better leader/candidate in their respective area!
So under current top-leader’s monopoly of appointment power the winner, including the incumbent’ is suspected of being the favourite of the top leader and not the state membership. So the arena for leadership struggle is not the state party election, but the campaign/lobbies to the top leader-by SMS’es or any other means. The local membership at large are kept in the dark in a party that officially champion democracy.
Looking at the numerous failures in making good choices viz the prevalence of froggy leaders in the party, it is advisable for PKR to start the democratisation from within the party-starting by devolving the over-concentrated power of appointment of the top leader! Then may be there will be less leadership tussles in various states where state elections will decide conclusively who have the confidence and mandate of the state members. Look like the party need to go further than merely holding direct elections on the top posts to reach the distant destination of `democracy-polis’. BN’s rule by the party chief’s dictate does not work in BN-neither does it work in PR when transplanted. As real examples of alternative /more democratic operation: there are countries/parties where the local candidates/chiefs are chosen by primary elections in the respective constituencies-and the winners cannot be changed even by the top leaders or anyone else!


