Mahathir's Selective Memory Should Come With More Accountability

In the aftermath of the investigations against Tun Daim, former Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohamad faces criticism and questions about his actions throughout his political career. In response to recent events, Mahathir has complained in the media, that he has been rewarded with “persecution” after both him and former finance minister Daim Zainuddin helped with Anwar’s re-election campaign during the Port Dickson by-election in 2018.

When Anwar contested in a seven-way fight in Port Dickson in 2018, Daim, who at the time chaired the Council of Eminent Persons, joined the former’s campaign and urged locals to support Anwar.

Asked if he thinks it’s a form of revenge or witch hunt conducted by the current government against him for the perception that Anwar was jailed and prosecuted under the nonagenarian’s first tenure as prime minister, Mahathir said he was unsure.

“I don’t know whether this is revenge.

“If I did something wrong, please investigate (me) but don’t use the government to threaten people,” he said.

However, the loss of his deposit in Langkawi and his various political failures after Langkah Sheraton, certainly raises doubts about his influence on Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim's campaign trail in Port Dickson.

In fact, it can be appropriate to suggest that Mahathir's impact on Anwar's campaign is minimal, bringing to light potential irrelevance in Mahathir's current political standing – which makes it all the sadder considering the chaos that happen after Langkah Sheraton, let alone the narrative that he initially spread that he was the “victim” in the whole fiasco.

But let’s not lose focus, while Mahathir seems adept at portraying himself as a victim, the real concern lies in whether he, along with former finance minister Daim Zainuddin, may have been involved in financial improprieties. It has long been an open secret that Mahathir was extremely good at “rewarding his friends” and for many netizens, the Daim investigations is a culmination of long-growing calls of investigating their activities, emphasizing the principle that nobody should be above the law.

There is public skepticism, with concerns about the accountability of "big fish" like Daim and Mahathir within a system they once controlled. The notion that the prime minister enjoys virtual immunity from prosecution compared to former leaders raises questions about the fairness of the legal system but this should be ignored to ensure for the sake of finding the truth.

The urgency for an unbiased investigation into Mahathir and Daim's financial dealings is underscored, challenging the perception that they might escape accountability due to their past positions of power. The call for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to expedite its investigations without fear or favor is paramount.

In response to Mahathir's accusations that investigations into him are a form of revenge, it highlights the need for accountability regardless of past support. The article rejects the notion that politicians should be immune from investigation if they receive support during elections, emphasizing the importance of upholding the rule of law.

As Mahathir attempts to deflect attention from potential investigations, it is warned against falling for his manipulative tactics. This is the perfect time for these investigations given Mahathir's diminished relevance.