THESE days, one would have expected the whole issue with Prasarana’s ex-chairman Datuk Seri Tajuddin Abdul Rahman getting the boot fiasco to be a thing of the past and that there are more important things to fret about.
But unfortunately, political pundits would be quick to agree that nothing in Malaysian politics ever stay buried or forgotten for long, and the ensuing chapters in the Tajuddin saga is a clear indication of this.
Recently, an UMNO source revealed that Tajuddin’s sacking as Prasarana chairman and a probe by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) could make UMNO retract its support for the Perikatan Nasional-led Government earlier than August.
The source further said that UMNO leaders were confident that the sacking and the MACC probe into alleged abuse of power by Tajuddin were part of Bersatu’s ‘political games’ aimed at ‘taking revenge against senior UMNO leaders’.
But then again, not everything is a conspiracy. If anything, UMNO’s ‘reaction’ to the entire drama feels like an excuse to reignite its ongoing tiff with Bersatu, and if this is truly the case, this could spell trouble for the country.
So is Tajuddin’s sacking actually politically motivated?
To recap, his dismissal as the chairman of Prasarana came after his conduct during a press conference on the LRT crash drew heavy criticism for his lack of empathy for the victims of the tragedy, and for his lack of professionalism when handing questions from the press.
Anyone who had seen the press conference would surely agree that it was cringe-worthy. The straw that broke the camel’s back has got to be the minister saying “Only the two cars are together…they kissed each other”, followed by a snicker.
If the press conference is any indication, maybe the simplest explanation might the right one, and that would be that Tajuddin really is incompetent, insensitive and simply unfit for his role.
A quick search online revealed that in numerous countries around the world, it is a norm for the person in charge – especially a minister – to resign on moral grounds following an accident or tragedy.
In Taiwan, for example, its transportation minister recently resigned to take responsibility for a train derailment earlier this month that killed 49 people and injured more than 200 others.
Following this line of logic, why should Tajuddin, in his then-capacity as chairman of Prasarana – be any different?
hile there were thankfully no casualties in the LRT collision, the trauma and the fact that something like this had happened on his watch, should be reason enough for him to resign.
But he did no such thing. In fact, he had hit out at his critics for “provoking” him to resign, and this really does tell you plenty about a person’s moral compass and character, doesn’t it? – June 5, 2021
