Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad's dramatic resignation has raised a conundrum of what exactly happened on that fateful day. Think about these questions:-

  • Was it in or out of character for Mahathir (at the 'peak' of his career) to bow out and say goodbye for good in tears?

  • I don't know whether you observed on TV but when he made the shocking announcement, certain people around him never flinched or reacted, as if it was expected. Only known Mahathir's loyalist looked shocked and distressed. What does that mean?

  • The fact that Mahathir retracted his resignation after an hour was not declared by the man himself. Our eyes did not see and our ears did not hear it. In fact everything that was supposedly attributed to him was conveyed to us by news reports of what others in Umno said.

    How do we know he really did? He might not have retracted or if he did, was it possible that he had for purposes of leveraging put conditions for retraction without compliance of which his retraction would not take effect?

  • It was reported he asked for Tengku Razaleigh. We are not told why he did so and what transpired between them.

  • Regarding the 16-month transition to transfer power, was this personally requested by Mahathir or stated by others? How could a man like Mahathir having thought for long of resigning had not worked or spelled out details of transition and instead "appeared" to have "delegated" these details to Umno supreme council? How can this be believed?

  • When he resigned, was it voluntary, free and happy decision or was he pressured or told to go so that his resignation was in reality a case of constructive dismissal?

    Otherwise why did he choose to close the chapter of his rule which was supposedly on a high note on such a tearful one? Was he constructively dismissed in the sense that he was manoeuvered into a position that it was hopeless to carry on?

    • It is not an issue here to debate the advantages and disadvantages of having Mahathir to carry on leading the country for so long.

    It is not debated here whether the country could do without him.

    We are not discussing whether he deserved a well-earned rest from heavy responsibilities.

    It is also not an issue whether his successor can do as well if not better than him.

    It is not an issue whether his administration, both good and bad, is on balance and in final analysis, good or bad.

    It is not even a question of whether we like him or dislike him for I am sure Malaysians are divided on that.

    There is but only one matter of importance — the truth behind what we witnessed.

    We know that he broked down when announcing his resignation. We do not know what he was going to say after that. Did he retract that resignation? If he did, did he attach any condition for retraction? Was the 15-month transition a condition of Mahathir or others?

    If he was the revered and beloved leader as portrayed often, and indeed the Umno bigwigs were imploring him to stay on because the rakyat (people) wished so, we want to know if their sincerity and the subsequent events as reported were true and consistent. Until we hear the story directly from Mahathir, how can we be sure?

    We have doubts simply because it is out of element for a man of his stature to resign in tears and then retract it within an hour without saying it so himself. Some of us may not like him but we have known him for more than 20 years to tell that it was out of character for him to resign that way.

    For that long a period of his administration, for the better or the worse, we Malaysians are entitled to know the truth regarding the tumultuous events of last few days. It is significant for us to know.

    Already as reported by malaysiakini, foreign funds are liquidating stocks because they do not believe in the sustainability of Mahathir's policies after his departure.

    There is an old Chinese saying that when you want to get rid off lallang, you have to chop and extricate the roots. One does not leave roots to grow for 16 months to sprout new offshoots. I agree there's more than what meets the eye, the jury is still out and verdict is not in.

    Can't Mahathir anytime in the 16 months say that he is not satisfied about the way things run and then declare that he has changed his mind to retire?

    We should not forget that Umno's and BN's stated reason for letting him go is ostensibly to respect his wish. It is not because they don't want or need him. This means the door is still open for Mahathir to say that he has changed his mind and that he now wishes to stay.

    To clear all unnecessary speculations and conspiracy theories and in the interest of transparency, the matter of the 16-month transition should be debated and sanctioned by a full parliament sitting and not by just a small inner group of elitists within Umno supreme council to whom BN component parties look for direction and follow unquestioningly.

    In that parliament sitting, Mahathir must be present (after his holiday) to give it transparency and legitimacy. Under such conditions, all deliberations (and what Mahathir says) and resolutions passed will be recorded in Hansard and reported in media and only then Malaysians will unanimously accept the PM's decision, putting to rest with finality this issue.