How has nepotism and cronyism been interpreted and stretched too far

 

RECENTLY, Segambut MP Hannah Yeoh was attacked on all sides just became she is the wife of the CEO of Asia Mobiliti Sdn Bhd, one of two companies given a 9-month trial by the Selangor State Government for the Demand-Responsive Transit (DRT). 

        If anything, the pressure should come on the Selangor State Exco Ng Sze Han and his team for the choices that they had made. They were the ones who made the selection. 

Monopoly, Cronyism or Nepotism?

        However, to be fair to Ng, he has come out with his press statement albeit late, but it explains the reasons why two companies were selected, and how they enjoyed the same terms and conditions. 

        Yet, there are still the incessant calls by certain quarters who asked for Asia Mobiliti to be dropped. Is it to allow the other company to enjoy the monopoly? Their motive is what you and I can expect coming from some young minister wannabes. They have since added another dimension to their whole story by saying there are over 30 companies which "should be" qualified by the Land Public Transport Agency (APAD).

        The selection of the two companies was based on their ability to deliver, not based on favouritism or nepotism. Ng should know that Ramachandran Muniandy who heads Asia Mobiliti is Yeoh's husband, but did he give Asia Mobiliti the monopoly or more favours compared to its competitor? The answer is a straight no. 

        Given such a situation, where only two companies were qualified or approved by the APAD at the material time, what would you expect Ng to do? To choose only one company would mean giving monopoly of the DRT to either Asia Mobiliti or Perbadanan Coach Sdn Bhd, but he did not.

        The fact that Anthony Loke is the minister of transport overseeing APAD, does it also mean that Loke was practising nepotism by approving Asia Mobiliti? 

        How ridiculous this would have been if those same detractors had even played on this note!

        Asian Culture

        We have to face the fact that in Asian culture, especially in the state of Sarawak, everyone is related to each other. 

        It is not difficult for you to eat with someone and he will start telling you, "That one sitting over there is my Uncle's son's wife, who married the brother of my cousin, who is sitting beside her." 

        Most Westerners' head would spin. They would need to pick up a pen and a paper to draw the web of relationship, but for an Asian, it is easy because there are more words to the vocabulary on family ties. For such a long description, it could have been summarised with just one word in the Asian language.

        For the Westerners, in fact, the two women talking to each other sitting at the next table is indeed my cousin and her sister-in-law. 

        Because culturally we are different, it is not right for a policy designed for the Western world to be transplanted fully in this part of the world. 

        Besides there is this fiilal piety which is alien to the Westerners. The American culture is more centred on the individuals than the extended family.

        It is easy for the Westerners to keep family relationships out of the equation, but in Asia, filial piety "is the virtue of exhibiting love and respect for one's parents, elders, and ancestors, particularly within the context of Confucian, Chinese Buddhist, and Daoist ethics." 

        Even Christians hold on to their Asian traditions. Although filial piety is about the parents, the elders and the ancestors, it is also about the brothers and sisters, the cousins, nephews and nieces who share the same descendants. 

        We all want our family members to succeed. It is hard to depart from it. It is therefore not difficult to find in some Chinese family businesses where the uncle owns the company and working for him are his own brothers and sisters, his nephews and nieces. Is that considered nepotism?

        What about this other scenario which many of us are familiar with. Many of us who move from one company to another, do we not bring along with us our suppliers whom we have had good working relationships in the past? Are we then guilty of cronyism? 

        Therefore, my argument is that both cronyism and nepotism have to be re-defined within the Aisan Context. 

Redefining Cronyism and Nepotism

       

Because my plan is to focus my doctoral dissertation on corruption, I have been giving a lot more thoughts to words such as 'bribery', 'cronyism' and 'nepotism.' 

        For example, the culture of giving hampers during festive seasons, are these gifts considered bribes? Or, is there a certain amount allowable for the sake of building good relations with clients? The Malaysian government allows a basket of fruits to be given as gifts for anyone who wants to show their appreciation to a department head. Usually the fruits are being shared out by the staff.

        There needs be more discussions on what is cronyism and nepotism then. In my opinion, both practices are only wrong if the selection of the contractors or suppliers are made by people who are related to them.

        It is best for the relatives of these contractors not to be involved in the selection process. Instead, they should allow an independent committee to assess the best from a list of bidders so that there is no influence or pressure from anyone. 

        In the past, I would suggest the suppliers I have known from previous jobs to give their best quotations. I would then bring the quotations to the immediate superior and discuss with him my honest opinions about all the suppliers, allowing him to make the final decision. 

        Being impartial in selection sometimes means looking at what is being offered without even knowing who the bidders are. The bidders are only known as A, B and C. Of the three bidders, the selection committee chooses the best to be awarded the contract. 

        In this DRT and other cases, each bidder should be treated as individuals and their proposals assessed based on what they offer to the state; or else, it goes against all arguments that family relationship is pivotal in our Asian society and culture. 

        There is no reason why someone who is related to the prime minister, for example, cannot bid for a job especially if he is well-qualified, or maybe, the best qualitifed person for the job. If there are others who are qualified to apply, ask them to apply, but do not exclude the family members or friends of the politicians from the tender. 

Also read this:

https://come-to-senses.blogspot.com/2024/05/exercise-some-critical-thinking-before.html