There is presently a raging debate as to whether there is a need for the government to further extend the services of the IGP Tan Sri Musa Hassan. From the statements made by various quarters including politicians from both the political divide, there is an obvious split with one party in favour, while another is against an extension. The opposition is firmly of the view that Tan Sri Musa Hassan's services should not be extended, and the government has yet to to make a final decision, although rumours are abound of a probable extension.
The opposition alleged that Tan Sri Musa Hassan was involved in trampling evidences and miscarriage of justice in the Anwar Ibrahim's 'black eye' incident in 1998 involving former IGP Rahim Noor. But the investigation on the aforesaid allegation carried out by MACC in March this year, cleared Tan Sri Musa Hassan and AG Gani Patail of any wrong doing. Anwar Ibrahim who is now facing a second sodomy charge is ardament that Tan Sri Musa Hassan's extension of service may have influence the on going trial that would favour the prosecution; a fear that will normally be felt by someone who is likely to face a 20 years jail sentence, if found guilty.
Tengku Razaleigh in an article posted in his blog dated July 14, 2009 had claimed that the “extension of service is meant to be an extraordinary measure. It is in danger of becoming a norm. This is bad practice”. And he went further to list out 5 astonishing reasons for his disapproval, and the one that caught my attention was when he wrote that “Public servants owe their allegiance to King and country, not to politicians. It is by an accumulation of bad practices like this that the once independent ethos of the civil service has been eroded”.
I have no reasons to argue and to disapprove what Tengku Razaleigh had written that is wise, bold and truly a masterpiece of a statement that cannot be ignored by the government, and more so by the head of the public service. It is a strong and damning statement, but somehow politicians in their new found fame as the Yang Berhormat have forgotten that they do not own the civil service (Armed Forces included), and neither should the public service to be treated subserviently by the political masters. A conflict of interest between public servants and politicians have been known to occur in the past, but in the end it is the former that is to suffer the consequences. One has only to follow the consequences that led to the charges of bribery labeled against Tourism Board Director General Dato Mirza Taiyab, to understand what politicians can do to an innocent public servant, if the politician's personal interests is not served by the public servant. It is a demeaning act by a politician, to say the least.
The Armed Forces is now facing a similar predicament as with its police counterpart. It is rumoured that the Chief of Defence Forces (CDF) who is presently on a year's extended service, and scheduled to retire in September, is said to seek a second extension. If this is true, the Chief of Air Force who is the most senior of the three service chiefs, and a likely candidate for the exulted position of the CDF , is most unlikely to get a promotion, and neither will it be the Chief of Army, since both are scheduled to retire next year. And if a second extension is indeed granted to the incumbent CDF, it will be the Chief of Navy who will most likely succeed the post of CDF upon the retirement of the incumbent CDF. This gives the navy a second opportunity to the exulted post of the CDF, and never once for the air force.
If someone were to ask me of my personal opinion regarding the above, I would just say that the practise of extending the services of the chiefs including the CDF must cease. There is no justifiable reason, nor does it makes any professional sense to offer an extension, because the post of the CDF could be taken over by either one of the three service chiefs who are competent and capable enough to take over the post of the CDF at any given point of time. And by virtue of their high ranking position, seniority and experience, it is absurd to now say that neither one is ready to become the CDF, as a justification to retain the incumbent for an extended term. In short, I would say that no one person is indispensable in the Armed Forces, regardless of the position one holds.
CRUSADE AGAINST CORRUPTION