PETALING JAYA: A PKR leader today questioned the proposal by DAP and Amanah for Shafie Apdal to be given the opportunity to become prime minister if Anwar Ibrahim does not gain sufficient support, reminding them of Pakatan Harapan’s (PH) original agreement before the 2018 general election.
“Why are you acting up?” central leadership council member Abdullah Sani Abdul Hamid said.
The suggestion was made earlier this week by DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng and Amanah president Mohamad Sabu, who said Warisan president Shafie should be given the opportunity if Anwar, who is PKR president, is unable to gain the support of enough MPs to topple the Perikatan Nasional government.
Abdullah, who is Kapar MP, said the question of who should become prime minister was guided by the people’s mandate given to PH in the 14th general election.
“We follow the mandate: after Dr Mahathir Mohamad, it is Anwar Ibrahim,” he said.
Adding that the issue had only suddenly arisen, he said: “What is their problem? During GE14, whose party symbol did they use? Did they use PPBM’s symbol?”
Former PKR leader Mohamad Ezam Mohd Nor meanwhile said the statement by DAP and Amanah showed that they needed another prime minister candidate to return to power.
“Their willingness to back another leader as prime minister isn’t just unfair. It also goes against the reformasi spirit which forms the backbone of PH.”
Lim and Mohamad, better known as Mat Sabu, previously disagreed that PH with its 91 seats could negotiate with anyone while excluding Warisan and Mahathir’s faction.
They also disagreed that change could happen without PKR.
They confirmed that Shafie had been proposed by Lim and supported by Mohamad as a third candidate in a bid to resolve the impasse between Anwar and Mahathir over the top post.
Ezam, who has expressed a desire to return to PKR, said politicians who spoke on reforms could not comprise on the prime minister’s post.
“A reformist machinery and government needs to be led by someone who carries that agenda. It is not about Anwar, but reforms.”