JULY 27 — Yesterday, the front page headline, “Only on merit” was printed in bold letters on the widest circulated English daily newspaper of Malaysia. That certainly caught my eye.

I am sure that particular headline got many people’s attention, but I am not sure how many actually bothered to pay RM1.50 for a copy of the newspaper. Well, I must confess that I bought a copy, although I deeply resent the way the newspaper is operated. (I am sure you know what I mean.)

Here, I would really like to commend Tan Sri Sidek Hassan, the Chief Secretary to the Government (Federal, obviously), for the circular that he sent to all the civil servants directing them to report to their superiors if they are asked for “favours” by politicians and the “well-connected.”

But I won’t. Not because I don’t like him (I don’t know him personally) or because he serves a government that I am not particularly fond of. I am not commending him for issuing the seemingly laudable circular for several reasons. Although the directive contained in the circular may at first glance seem to be a good idea, I strongly believe that it is not what it seems. Here’s why:

Shouldn’t all contracts, government or otherwise, be awarded based on merit in the first place? If a person does not possess a set of values to know that, or does not have the integrity to stand up to crooked politicians or their kakis, then that person should not be hired at all for a position that comes with the authority to influence the awarding of government contracts.

If we keep having to come up with new laws, rules, directives, etc. to regulate the behaviour of people, I am afraid that one day all our law students will be unable to memorise their textbooks and statute books.

Think about it. There’s a very good reason why we are constantly reminded by our law lecturers to just remember the principle(s) applied by the judges in the cases before the courts, and not to simply memorise the section number or the name of the case. (I wonder how many students actually followed their lecturers’ advice.)

Secondly, how do we know that the directive contained in the circular will be complied with? Moreover, I seriously doubt that the directive can be enforced effectively. There are so many loopholes to exploit.

Here’s one quick example: It was reported in that popular English daily that the directive covers various recommendations (three examples were cited) made in all forms of communication (Twitter was not mentioned though), as well as for all sorts of benefits.

Now, what if a well-known politician’s son just turned up at the director’s office, let’s say of the Road Transport Department, took the director out for lunch, then conveniently applies for a special dark tint for his car after lunch? Without asking for a favour at all. Does the directive still apply? Even if it did, I am sure the director can make a strong argument for the negative.

That’s just one example. I am sure Malaysians can come up with many more innovative ways to manipulate the directive. Perhaps one day a Malaysian politician or a crony businessman will publish a book entitled, “The Art of Manipulation.” (It will probably be plagiarised, and the original author a politician or salesman from another country who has been there and done that.)

Last but not least, I always try to read between the lines when I am consuming "news" published by the mainstream media (international media included). Indeed, I try to go beyond the lines altogether and consider the timing of the "news" article.

In this particular instance, when speculations of an impending general election and/or Sarawak state election are rife, one cannot but wonder whether this particular news item has anything to do with that.

It is very obvious that our prime minister has not only been trying very hard to portray himself as a "reformist" (which somehow sounds like something his opponent is known for) but he is also going all out to woo Sarawakian voters. If you don’t believe me, just google “Najib” and “Sarawak” together.

Do you know what’s worse than a crooked politician or crony businessman manipulating a government official for a personal benefit? Well, I reckon that trying to manipulate a national newspaper to hoodwink the entire English-reading population definitely qualifies.

If you still think I am talking nonsense, then go and analyse all the front page headlines today. Not just the English dailies. Check out the Malay and Chinese ones, too. Why is it that only this particular paper highlighted this issue?

What type of Malaysian will be most concerned about the issue of meritocracy? English-educated, urban, middle-class Malaysians. What newspaper will they most probably read? For the answer, google the front page headline I mentioned above.

Therefore, I must humbly say to Tan Sri Sidek Hassan, “Nice try. Close, but no cigar.”

* The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist.