There’s this big news about a very senior civil servant said to have shouted at a less senior civil servant at Kuala Lumpur International Airport recently. There might have been some stamping of feet – possibly of passports too.
Most uncivil behaviour, if you ask me. Allegedly uncivil, of course: so far there have been merely unproven allegations and counter allegations from many sides.
The civil servants’ union of the department involved has been up in arms on this matter. That’s only fair, they’re just doing what they are supposed to do, defending one of their members against high-handed behaviour by a superior. Allegedly high-handed!
But public sector unions seem to have developed an identity crisis. Recently one member of another such union spoke up defending their superiors – technically their adversaries – who apparently claimed that the hiring of civil servants is based purely on merit. Allegedly, I might add again!
I’d have thought that task was for civil service leaders to take up, if not ministers at the very least, but we didn’t hear anything from them except for a short answer in Parliament. They seem to have conveniently passed the job on to the union to do it for them.
On many occasions in my working life, I had dealt with unions and faced walkouts, go-slows and burning of effigies; never once, though, did the unions ever stand up to defend me and the management.
Most unions just want to do what unions do – defend the working class. They aren’t supposed to be playing politics (except for union politics, which can be pretty interesting), and their only path to “datukships” is for their children to marry early and procreate.
These unions just whacked and whacked and whacked, which can be very painful if it’s you who’s being whacked. But at least you know where they stand, and most importantly, they seem to know where they stand, too.
Surprise, surprise – action by the PM
In the case of the KLIA incident, the prime minister, in a surprising move, actually did something! He convened a very powerful committee made up of all the top law enforcement and compliance officers in the land.
He couldn’t have taken it any higher, short of involving the Conference of Rulers, who might not take kindly to being dragged into such matters.
The next highest level would’ve been the Cabinet. The problem is there isn’t any room big enough to accommodate the 70 people (allegedly!) in the Cabinet to investigate the matter. Possibly not exactly 70 people, though. Some positions – a deputy prime minister or two, an odd party-hopping minister or two – still haven’t been filled, or were filled when they shouldn’t have been.
The Dewan Rakyat at Parliament House is probably big enough to accommodate this group, but it’s been quite busy lately producing the odd good law here and there, so best not to disturb it while it’s on a roll.
Many ministers are also out travelling with their families and friends overseas. Some other cabinet-level appointments could be away in some foreign countries sucking up to their authoritarian leaders and making up policies on the fly. There might not be a quorum for such a meeting .
Thus, the PM called on the civil service to investigate itself. Get a bunch of big bosses from other areas to drop everything they’re doing and focus on this matter.
In the picture therefore are the attorney-general, who heads the panel, the inspector-general of police, the auditor-general and the chief commissioner of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission!
So many “generals” (and a chief) told to investigate another “general” – the director-general of the Public Service Department. Another “general”, the director-general of Immigration, had been asked earlier to investigate but the idea of one general investigating another might not have sounded so good, hence the addition of more generals.
Top-down anger management
I don’t think there’s ever been such an assemblage of some of the most important public servants in the country to look into one disciplinary matter. The panel has been described as an “overkill” by some, and there may be some truth to that.
On the matter of the alleged offence itself, it’s perfectly acceptable in Malaysia for a higher-up, whether in politics, civil service, business or society at large, to shout at a lower-down, in public or in private.
It’s part of our tradition, and is to be cherished as a pure and original Malaysian cultural practice not corrupted by any external influences or colonialist mindset.
I can attest to this. At the multinational corporations where I worked, it wasn’t acceptable for bosses to shout at lower level people. I’ve also worked in a number of locally-owned corporations where shouting and screaming was to be expected and tolerated.
It’s important that we rid our country of alien practices introduced by foreigners, such as Japanese cultural celebrations, German annual beer binges, maybe Christmas and Valentine’s Day – or even democracy, too – so that we can preserve and cherish our own time-honoured local ways.
Allegations have been made that a power struggle at the very top of the Malaysian civil service is behind this kerfuffle. But, so what? Struggles for power and positions at the top are a normal and healthy part of the way Keluarga Malaysia works. Or doesn’t work.
It’s enough to make one scream
I hope another extremely important matter is also investigated: was the alleged public shouting done in English or Malay? Any breach of a clear national language policy deserves punishment, maybe even jail time.
I do wonder if there is an existing mechanism for handling such an issue. Wouldn’t the civil service have a protocol for it? It’s their job to make rules and protocols and enforce them. Had they been sleeping on the job and needed to be shouted at?
At one point, hopes of solving this issue were pinned on obtaining evidence from closed-circuit cameras. But either the cameras didn’t work, or they were cheap toys installed by the last sub-sub-contractor. So there went that plan.
Among the numerous national issues of the day – which foreign countries to visit, how many relatives to take along, how many MoUs to be signed, what shirts to wear – do we want our leaders to waste their precious time on something like this?
Since there’s going to be an investigation, let’s hope the results will be made public. Let’s hope rules will be put in place on how to handle this kind of issue in the future. We deserve to know which General was right, or wrong, and what action there will be on him if he’s guilty.
In the meantime, let’s feast on another example of kampung politics at work, where rules are made as we go along, while we insert politics into everything we do, for which we’re never accountable, and seeing ghosts and conspiracies everywhere.
I feel like shouting. But I’m retired, and I don’t have anyone under me to shout at.
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.