'Blunder and plunder' were the words that came to Universiti Malaya's political economist Prof Dr KS Jomo's mind when malaysiakini asked him to share his insights regarding Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad's recent resignation announcement.

Known for his bold criticisms against the premier's economic policies, Jomo suggests in this interview that the 16-month transition period leading to Mahathir's intended resignation in Oct 2003, should be characterised by reforms which include democratisation, accountability and greater socio-economic justice.

Malaysiakini: Were you surprised by Dr Mahathir's resignation speech?

Jomo: Of course. Many claimed he would stay in office indefinitely and there were indications to this effect, although we were blind to contrary indications. However, Mahathir has long enjoyed doing the unexpected, out-foxing us lesser mortals, if you will.

However, I also believe that he was not insincere in his earlier offers to retire. According to (former finance minister) Daim Zainuddin, at a recent Umno general assembly, when Mahathir wanted to quit in 1995 and 1997, (jailed ex-deputy premier) Anwar Ibrahim recruited Daim to persuade the premier to stay on.

That is why I do not believe Anwar was plotting in 1997-8 to usurp Mahathir. Anwar's weakness, if you will, was not being able to check and deter those urging him to 'take us out of this darkness' as someone not from his camp encouraged him to.

I think Mahathir knew from his reliable informants that despite policy and other differences, Anwar remained loyal. But (former Indonesian President) Suharto's surprise resignation (in 1998) and subsequent fate must surely have shaken Mahathir, even affecting his judgement. After all, Mahathir and Suharto were together in Cairo only the week before.

And as (former deputy prime minister) Musa Hitam and the premier himself have reminded us, Mahathir has long been unsettled by how the South Koreans sentenced two former presidents to death.

Do you agree that the timing of the resignation announcement was appropriate especially after several events which seem to reinforce Mahathir's flagging position?

After the strong recovery in 1999 and 2000, which seemed to vindicate Dr M's policies, the al-Maunah and Sept 11 incidents were like 'god-sents', allowing him to strengthen and reinvent himself as a moderate modernist Muslim ally of the US.

With PAS trying to retrieve waning Muslim support by feeling obliged to out-do Mahathir's own Islamic posturing, and the DAP impatient to claim the secular high ground for itself, at the expense of the painstakingly crafted compromises underlying the opposition alliance, the Barisan Alternatif was in trouble, providing Mahathir with yet another 'god-sent'.

I have no idea if the PM was really going to announce an exit plan at the end of his winding-up speech, or how it differed from the current transition scenario, but with the benefit of hindsight, his timing seems to make good sense, especially in light of these 'god-sents'.

What do you think will happen during the transition period?

There are some who still doubt a smooth transition and note how Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's hands are being tied by Mahathir, for example, over who should be his deputy. It is interesting that Abdullah has again postponed this time indefinitely the announcement of his deputy.

And Abdullah must certainly be very conscious that the last and first time Mahathir was elected party leader in a contest was in 1987, and that the last elected deputy leader was Anwar in 1993.

But much will depend on so many factors that I find prediction hazardous and not useful.

However, I do hope that Mahathir will choose to retire, leaving a more united country, based on justice and mutual understanding, for the new leadership to carry the country forward with. Right now, the country is divided, all the major parties including his own are badly divided.

Remember that Mahathir was rehabilitated and Abdullah was hand-picked and promoted by the late Prime Minister Tun Abdul Razak, who was serious about reducing poverty and inequality and promoting development for all.

For all the limitations of the National Economic Policy, Rukunegara, the Barisan Nasional and other Razak initiatives, three decades ago, they represented far more inclusive initiatives than the insider-outsider politics and public discourse we have today.

How do you think the transition period should be?

I hope the transition will be characterised by three major areas of reform which should always be kept in mind, however tough the odds:

Democratisation, including the institutionalisation of proportional representation in both houses of parliament as well as the repeal of the ISA and other repressive legislation.

The balance among the different arms of the state must be improved and the relative independence of the judiciary and the legislature restored.

We all know what has happened to the judiciary in recent years, and great effort is urgently needed to restore its credibility and for rule of law to be meaningful.

Right now, the legislature does little beyond providing legitimacy for the state. Most important debates are along narrow partisan lines with hardly any important legislative initiatives coming from the legislature.

Mahathir has developed a more powerful executive, which may have some advantages, but for this to be the case, we need greater competence and accountability in the cabinet, rather than simply represent the BN component parties.

Ministers, appointed for their competence, must be far more accountable than is presently the case. The age and other gaps between the current PM and his cabinet colleagues as well as the civil service have also affected the functioning of government.

Accountability of the state the executive, elected representatives and the public sector has to be greatly enhanced through greater transparency, a freer media and improved civic education.

Greater socio-economic justice, including improved social security provisions, better access to education, public health and decent housing for all, greater labour rights, easier and affordable credit access.

The disasters of the last two decades ill-conceived heavy industries, sogososhas (Japanese conglomerates), mega-projects, political business, money politics, privatisation and crony patronage have cost the nation hundreds of billions of ringgit due to blunder and plunder!

Consider how much Petronas has made over the decades and the value of the assets it has left. In the Fortune World 500, it is something like fifth among trans-national companies in developing countries, a tribute to Petronas' management; but then consider how much more it could have been if it had not been plundered to cover the blunders. We need to account for all this as soon as possible to cut the losses, recover as much as possible and to move forward.

You really think any of that is going to happen?

Optimism of the will, pessimism of the intellect. You are too young to be so cynical, and we must never stop asking tough questions. If the BN wants to outflank the BA, this is what the BN will have to do. It remains within the Malaysian political imagination.

This is the first part of a two-part series. Part two will be published tomorow.