On Wednesday (Oct 22) Thailand’s deputy finance minister Vorapak Tanyawong resigned from his post following allegations linking him to Cambodia-based cyberscam centres, according to an AFP report.
When the allegations surfaced, Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul ordered Vorapak to submit a written explanation this week. But he resigned, saying he wanted to focus on his legal defence.
Whatever his reasons, the fact that he resigned and that the prime minister demanded an explanation from the then deputy finance minister shows a strong commitment to public accountability.
Elected public officials are expected to be above suspicion, and when they are allegedly linked to any form of corruption — even if not yet proven in court — they resign, or, at least, they should.
Thailand’s current PM and the resigned minister should be commended for having the will to hold themselves to a standard of public conduct that is above reproach.
In Malaysia, though, that will is yet to be seen!
Over the last couple of months, a whistleblower released a succession of videos implicating politicians in Sabah’s ruling coalition, Gabungan Rakyat Sabah (GRS), in bribery scandals, but no one resigned from their govt posts. All denied involvement, saying they can’t recall, or the videos were fake or politically motivated — although the videos indicated otherwise!
Whether they can’t recall or the videos are fake or politically motivated, but if there is evidence of a scandal, shouldn’t these politicians be investigated and due action taken? No, not in Malaysia!
The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) is investigating two of the politicians implicated but the big names have been spared.
Despite the ongoing exposes, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has kept mum. In fact, he went about business as usual, mingling with GRS leaders on an official visit to Sabah. His coalition, Pakatan Harapan (PH) is, currently in the midst of discussions with GRS with regard to seat-sharing for the Sabah state elections on Nov 29, 2025. Business as usual!
The Opposition, Perikatan Nasional (PN), is no different. Its key component party, Bersatu, is split between members who want the party president, Muhyiddin Yassin, to be the PM-designate and those who want the deputy party president, Hamzah Zainuddin, for the post.
Those who support Hamzah appear to be the majority based on the statutory declarations by 120 divisions that wanted Muhyiddin to make way for Hamzah. The figure is more than half the number of divisions in the party. The leaders who got the SDs have subsequently been sacked, yet there has been no let-up among Muhyiddin’s supporters to name the former PM as the PM-designate in the next GE.
Non-supporters of Muhyiddin have no confidence that he can lead the party to form the next government.
Their reasons aside, the fact is that Muhyiddin is facing corruption charges in court and should not stand for election or be named PM-designate. But, typical of Malaysian politicians and their supporters, they want this fact overlooked and NOT to be considered as a deterrent to standing for elections.
They also give the reason that if Anwar could become PM despite his court cases, so could Muhyiddin. Anwar got a royal pardon but when he stood for election in the 2022 GE he had a court case which is still ongoing.
Anwar won that election and was appointed PM. If he is convicted, Muhyiddin is hoping that he, too, could get a royal pardon and become PM. That may take time but, but like Anwar, he could become PM while his case was ongoing.
Bersatu’s leadership issue can be easily solved if the president calls for an election for the president’s post or resigns. He may be reluctant to do either as it would mean that he could not return as PM.
A precedent was set and now for the sake of expediency, it is being followed. But should it be allowed?
Anwar was not the only one who stood for election while his court case was ongoing.
In the 2022 general elections, four politicians facing court charges stood for election. The Election Commission accepted their nomination papers with no questions asked! All were elected!
Anwar was one of them. Former DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng, former Muda president Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman, and Umno president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi were the others. All were elected as MPs. Lim and Syed Saddiq hold no public office. Zahid, however, who in 2018 was slapped with 47 corruption charges, was named a deputy prime minister in Anwar’s Cabinet.
Malaysian leaders brazenly and openly hold on to their positions even with ongoing court cases and stand for election, claiming that the cases are politically motivated, therefore implying that they did no wrong.
They argue on the principle of innocence until proven guilty, thus justifying standing for election and staying in power despite allegations of corruption.
They do not realise that even a hint of a scandal raises questions and doubts in the minds of voters and robs them of their right to elect a candidate free from suspicions. It is the responsibility of the individual candidate to present himself/herself as a clean candidate acceptable to the people and the party must ensure that that standard is lived up to.
Leaders who act contrary to that standard have not understood that if they are associated with any scandal, it confuses the voters who will have to make a difficult choice between a clean candidate and one who they have always trusted but now is suspect. In less discerning constituencies, the latter may win — initially — until the voters wake up to the fact that they have been duped.
When leaders fail to maintain a standard of conduct expected of them for whatever reasons, they should resign to give voters the chance to choose a candidate they have no reason to doubt. The act of resignation communicates to the voters that that representative will not betray their trust. It is an honourable act.
If they won’t resign, then the voters should teach such leaders a lesson and boot them out of office.
It will be interesting to see if those implicated in the Sabah videos will stand for election in the Sabah state elections next month. If they do, it will be equally interesting to see if the voters will elect them.
If the voters don’t elect them, they will be showing themselves to be mature and discerning voters who rightfully taught these errant leaders a lesson and punished them out of office!
If they do, they will be showing up leaders who took advantage of their voters’ trust because these leaders lacked the will to do the right thing.