If a prime minister will not censure his deputy for telling recipients of government allocations to vote for his and the prime minister’s coalitions, what are the people to conclude except that it is what Muda president Syed Saddiq Abdul Rahman says it is: normalising corruption.

What was Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s response to criticisms of Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi who — after giving an allocation of RM250,000 to the Terengganu Youth Council and RM200,000 to motorcycle teams throughout Terengganu — told the recipients there would be more aid if they voted for the blue (Barisan Nasional (BN)) and red (Pakatan Harapan (PH) wave?

He said it was not related to the state elections. Anwar is right, the allocations by itself may be unrelated to the state elections but he chose to ignore the fact that Zahid actually said “vote for the blue and red wave” after giving the allocations. Isn’t that a blatant and brazen, and very public invitation to vote for his side immediately after giving aid?

Zahid uttered the words but the prime minister failed to address it and by omitting this fact that is on public record, he dismissed the issue as a non-issue. By skewing the truth by omission, Anwar, has justified keeping an ally in government.

To make matters worse Anwar as PKR president has nominated a convict to stand for election in the state seat of Permatang in Selangor. Mohd Yahya Mat Sahri who was former Selangor menteri besar Khalid Ibrahim’s special officer, was jailed for two years in 2016 for cheating a businessman over a RM50,000 donation to sponsor an event.

Doesn’t PKR know what the federal constitution says about convicted politicians?

Article 48(1)(e) provides: 48(1) Subject to the provisions of this Article, a person is disqualified for being a member of either House of Parliament if –

(e) he has been convicted of an offence by a court of law in the federation… and sentenced to imprisonment for a term of not less than one year or to a fine of not less than two thousand ringgit and has not received a free pardon; or

(3) The disqualification of a person under paragraph….(e) may be removed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong…”.

Yahya was jailed for two years. How could he be nominated to stand for election? It can be argued that Article 48(1) is relevant only to either House of Parliament and does not apply to the state elections.

That’s a convenient cop-out, isn’t it? Shouldn’t the same principle of proper conduct acceptable in Parliament be acceptable for state politicians as well? What logic is it that the standard of conduct for parliamentarians does not apply to assemblypersons?

Surely PKR has qualified non-convicts to stand for election? They can’t be so desperate that they have no choice but to nominate a convict?

In addition, Lim Guan Eng, chairman of DAP, which is a partner in Anwar’s PH-BN unity government, and who is facing an ongoing corruption case in court, is standing for election in the state seat of Air Puteh in Penang.

Lim with Anwar, Zahid and Syed Saddiq, who are all facing ongoing court cases, stood for election in GE15 and won. They shouldn’t have, but they did and we can dismiss it as a first offence of a lapse in judgement. But, to repeat a mistake is no longer an error in judgement but a demonstration of a simply very low common denominator of public conduct totally inconsistent with the standard of integrity advocated by Anwar’s madani government in which they represent.

What else is mind-boggling is that the Election Commission accepted the nomination papers of these candidates! In Air Putih and Permatang, the people should vote to reject these candidates and make it clear to politicians that they will not tolerate compromised candidates.

It is a great relief that Syed Saddiq did not offer himself for a state seat! Hopefully, his corruption case will be disposed of well before the next general election so that he can stand for election confidently on a clean slate.

All these politicians, including all others facing court charges should not stand for public office until their cases are disposed of. These cases should be expedited so that the issues are resolved and the public is not left wondering whatever happened to them.

As to whether these court cases — including the new case taken against Anwar after he received a royal pardon for his previous sodomy case — will ever see the light of day under Anwar’s madani government is another omission that has left the public in the dark and which the prime minister makes no effort to address.

If Anwar keeps omitting pertinent facts regarding issues of public significance, he will be nurturing a culture that promotes a lack of transparency in government.

The PJD link is a case in point. Residents affected by the PJD link project took the Selangor government to court to get it to release the project documents which the state government claimed came under the Official Secrets Act.

After the Selangor Assembly was dissolved to pave the way for state elections, caretaker menteri besar Amirudin Shari cancelled the project. Then, he said the project could be revived if certain requirements are met.

The residents have given him a one-week notice to state the requirements, otherwise, they intend to continue with their lawsuit to get access to the documents.

Why is a state government not releasing information that the residents want to know about a project that would disrupt their life? It is the same lack of transparency the federal government exhibits in some of its decisions.

If all this isn’t normalising corruption and encouraging a lack of transparency, what then is it?

In the state elections on Aug 12, the people have a choice to maintain the status quo or elect leaders who will hold themselves to the highest standard of public conduct and honour the trust of the people to uphold their interests. So, think before voting so that we don’t regret after, because it may be too late then.