Oh Ei Sun of the Singapore Institute of International Affairs said it was vital for the Pakatan Harapan component to take a firm stance against corruption to retain its core progressive and reform-minded support base.
“At the same time, it is also becoming increasingly important for DAP in particular, and PH in general, to remain in power in as many states as possible and at federal level.
“So DAP must carefully balance these two political priorities and necessities,” he told FMT.
Universiti Malaysia Sabah’s Bilcher Bala said quitting the state government over the alleged scandal would be viewed as nothing more than a publicity stunt.
He said every political party was expected to oppose all forms of wrongdoing, especially corruption, in order to retain its existing supporters and win over new voters.
“While there are allegations of corruption among members of certain parties, these are just allegations that haven’t been backed by solid evidence.
“Therefore, DAP should not entertain these allegations. If it does, the party would be perceived as seeking cheap publicity,” he said.
On Wednesday, DAP said it had given its Sabah chapter a “mandate to review its position in the Sabah government” in light of the alleged scandal. Party secretary-general Loke Siew Fook said it would be entirely up to Sabah DAP to decide on the next course of action.
Loke’s statement came a day after Sabah DAP secretary Vivian Wong praised Hajiji for refusing to approve mining prospecting licences to a businessman believed to be linked to the scandal.
Bilcher warned DAP that Loke’s statement could be perceived by Sabahans as interference by the party’s peninsula-based leadership in its state chapter’s affairs.
”With the rise of Sabah-centric politics of late, DAP needs to ride that wave if it wants to remain relevant in both Sabah and Sarawak,” said Bilcher.
However, Oh did not see any contradiction between Loke’s and Wong’s statements. He said Loke’s announcement represented a clear devolution of decision-making to the state chapter.
“Both statements cover all bases and neither one takes a clear and unequivocal stance,” he said.