The Internal Security Act detention order for five reformasi activists signed by home minister had to be based on police's investigations and advice. If the Federal Court had ruled that the police had acted in bad faith, the Minister's detention order based on this bad faith cannot legally and logically stand.

Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, in his capacity as the home minister, should have seized the moment and acted decisively to revoke the detention order on his own accord. He would then get the credit of abiding the law, doing justice.

By not having done so yet, he has lost the moral initiative. Already, the reformasi activists detained confirmed that they would not challenge by habeas corpus the obvious — the legality of the ministerial order. They would take the challenge to the political level by galvanising civil groups' support.

Now if Abdullah should subsequently revoke the order, he would then appear 'weak' and caving in to political pressure. If he tries, in the opposite, to be 'strong' by refusing to bow to pressure, the detainees can then resort to legal channels to impugn the ministerial order.

The Federal Court will then be hard pressed to not quash the ministerial detention order based on a police action that it earlier found to be in bad faith. By the time the court orders, in the interest of consistency, the release of detainees, the minister would look stubborn for not correcting, on his own accord, that which is obviously untenable.

This is reminiscent of Ops Warta II which initially proceeded on the wrong assumption that it was the motoring public that had the duty to find out whether there was an unserved summons rather than the other way around, that the police had the duty to serve it.

In spite of Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Dr Rais Yatim putting publicly the finer points of difference between the two scenarios, Ops Warta II proceeded unfazed with the Home Minister's blessing. There appears to be reluctance on the part of the minister in charge to not want to stand down on any major issue even when it is untenable in law or logic.

One of the important prerequisites of leadership is quickness on the uptake, an ability to respond to challenges decisively and seize opportunities to one's political advantage.

Not to give in is strength when one is absolutely correct — or if one is not absolutely correct, then, at least the uncanny dexterity to get out of a difficult situation by a spin. Not to relent in the face of the untenable will give an appearance of not strength but obstinacy borne from insecurity.

Strength of leadership is the prerequisite for any CEO of Malaysia Incorporated. For the country at this moment confronts many challenges that she cannot overcome unless the CEO performs.

Some of the more obvious challenges outlined in general terms are:

  • The debate between Rais and Terengganu Menteri Besar Abdul Hadi Awang on whether to charge senior government officials with OSA for revealing classified information pertaining to the budget only underscores the basic problem of the government faced with civil servants/employees sympathetic to the opposition's cause. How could you administer if your own employees want to undermine your job? How does want resolve the "Anwar factor"?

  • The continuance of support by large sections in peninsula's east coast and northern belts (shown by Anak Bukit by-election) for PAS in spite of its extreme policies to segregate the sexes in public queues, implement hudud, and ban women from performing in live entertainment shows and concerts.

  • The existence of militants, some of whom are already detained, in our midst, with the promise of more to join the ranks if external events over which we have no control (eg. US attack on Iraq) exacerbate the problem.

  • Our economy continues to be adversely affected by this negative profiling after Sept 11 as being a nest of militants. It is directly dragged down by US slowdown and China's resurging competitiveness. Foreign direct investments and portfolio funds have dwindled here and have been re-channeled elsewhere to China, Thailand, etc.

  • With WTO and Afta looming ahead, our efforts at confronting globalisation are still at an embryonic stage of public debate as to how improve English through teaching of Science and Mathematics. Or how to ameliorate the negative effects of affirmative policies by 10 percent non-Malay intake in Mara, etc. or the reciprocal 10 percent Malay intake in private colleges etc. (to square off the quota).

  • With moribund stock markets, our distressed companies cannot restructure their debts and recover. Even if our banking system has liquidity, there are no bankable clients to lend. The KLSE and Securities Commission may have all kinds of good-practice directives and rules but they will not shore up confidence of corporate governance if every now and then corporate figures or political cronies siphon out millions through fictitious invoicing or invested millions of public companies' funds in palm oil land in Indonesia that turned out to be a swamp lands because our professional accountants are no more diligent in due care as Enron's auditors.

    • Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad is wise to give up re-election in Kubang Pasu when his record is still at the peak. Even he will find these challenges ahead daunting and taints on his record if he tries to grapple them and fails.

    His anointed successor has to carry on this burden. Can he rise up to the occasion? First, he must show he could overcome the minor trials posed by the remaining detained reformasi activists.

    Malaysia can overcome her trials and tribulations only when there is strong leadership, however one chooses to define "strong". Indeed what is "strong"? That is the question of critical importance for the times ahead.