I am not trying to be Ali and KJ's advocate or solicitor. Neither will I dispute the decision passed by the Umno Disciplinary Board to bar the Malacca Chief Minister to contest the party deputy president post, and the warning issued to the Rembau MP.
As I wrote in the previous postings, the mode of investigation should go into details as to be fair to everybody. I even suggested for those who lodged the reports to come under scrutiny as well because their motives and integrity should be looked at.
The definition of graft and money politics, too, should be under review as it creates a lot of controversy.
The Board is not a civil court. Its a panel set by Umno to investigate any allegations made by party members and the public about any wrongdoings that may lead to what they termed as 'money politics' in the party.
However, the timing of the special meeting prompted many to think that there was indeed a conspiracy to axe Ali and to put a stop to KJ's campaign for the Pemuda chief position. The general question from the public was that, why must they come up with such a decision only a week before the party general assembly?
Why didnt it happen after the general assembly or before nominations were made? Is this going to be a pattern in future party elections? If Ali was wrong, what about others whose names were oftenly ticked as being worse than that of Ali and KJ?
Why not from time to time the Board makes announcement about their new findings, and not just wait until the decision turns into political ammunitions...
Please remember that in some civil cases, we oftenly sent the wrong guy to prison. Some of them went to the gallow just because of unjust court decisions. It took us many years later only to realise that they were innocent!
This applies well to the Disciplinary Board. Investigations must cover every aspect of it, from those who lodged the reports until the persons who became the subject of guilt.
These are my points of contention. Nothing else...