Do you agree with the author?
“The 2 most vital and fundamental role of the elected Presidency are guardian of the national reserves and ensuring top public appointments undergo due diligence and has no conflict of interest. There are logical and genuine concerns that the newly walkover President may have potential conflict in fulfilling the above function. Until only recently, she is very close to the Government and has little to no track record of internally voicing any dissent against policies before while in Government. These concerns never featured much in public mainstream media prior to nomination day and the public patiently waited for the campaigning to be given the answer.
Had there been a contest, the public would have had the opportunity to hear this critical question of independence of the potential Presidential candidates to fulfil this incredibly important safeguard. Alas, instead of ensuring in the interest of the public, for a contest thus allowing for fair comparison on competency for financial acumen to fulfil one of the 2 vital roles, it seems the committee overrides the interest of the people by disqualifying 2 of the more financially experienced candidates, when they clearly had the option of allowing for it and had done so before in the last Presidential election. Meritocracy demands the best for the job is chosen.
This is sadly now unanswered with a no contest. We are instead focusing away into other credentials of the new President such as HDB living, first woman, tudung-wearing, almost a school dropout, etc., which are commendable but of less priority for the job. The anger of the public are not over baseless sentiments driven by racial biases. How can that be when the contest is reserved for a single race? The public is genuinely concern of the ability for the new President to have the necessary financial competence and independence required. A fair expectation for a patriotic, smart, informed and educated citizenry which should be respected and not be brushed aside as petty complaint and branded as divisive. It is an honest expression of feeling short-changed as well as our love for this country that the restless voice of the public is now raised to be heard.”
Source: Damanhuri Abas