I am in London now and feel the urge to write something after being infected by tk's exuberance. Before I comment about the NKF's saga, I will like to tell everyone that yesterday I had a wonderful plate of Char Kway Teow in London's Chinatown and feel damn shuan. Also, I had Teh Beng in London! Even though it costed like 3 pounds, i was very happy for the entire day :)
Anyway, back to the rot in NKF.
The main cause of the NKF's fiasco seems to boil down to the lack of checks and balances within the NKF system. At the same time, the idea that choosing capable and morally upright personnel as an alternative to a comprehensive checks and balances system seems to have failed in the light of recent revelations.
So what is with ths overwhelming public outrage, is it something new?
In the Singapore charity scene, the answer is yes. But the problem it highlights, namely the lack of checks and balances is a pretty ancient one. To my knowledge, it can be traced all the way back to the Enlightenment in the 18th century, in particular Montesquieu's notion of separation of powers. The idea of separation of different branches of government, with clearly delineated roles and powers, hopefully checking and restraining one another, was coined in an era where many were disillusioned with the incompetence of the Absolute French monarchy.
Now replace the dissolute and incompetent absolute monarch with T.T Durai and you get a French revolution... Well, maybe just a tiny revolution in the charity circuit.
So what are the wider implications?
I am a realist and I don't have a very glowing picture of human nature. Power corrupts. Some damn idealists don't get it. Some pragmatists get it, try to design mechanisms to circumnavigate and reduce the problem, but hey it is natural to want to stay in power, it is afterall human nature. (If you don't get it, too bad)
You see, the problem is when there is a rot at the top. In my view, there are two types of checks and balances, simply internal and external. Internal checks and balances are almost certainly useless when there is a rot at the top. The super lazar will spawn new lazars or incorporate new minions outside his kingdom and bring them under his fold. Obviously the smaller lazars will want to ingratiate the super lazar right! Special creatures engaged by the super lazar to inspect his pig farm would not want to complain too much. For what? One who survives by counting pigs also want to have pork...
Anyway, that leaves the external checks and balances. This can apply to a charty organisation or a private company, because there is a regulator, or a higher strata of authority that exists. But what happens when you talk about a one party nation, such as the CCP in China? If the rot starts from the top, than it will spiral downwards and the whole system will probably collapse. Don't even think about the benevolence of UN....
Some argue that look, even if you have a comprehensive checks and balances system, it is not going to deter a resourceful and "evil" genius from committing crimes. You need to choose people of integrity and honor.
That is true, but the whole NKF saga shows that you need both, it is not sufficient to have one without the other. Character judgement is not an exact science. In all likelihood, T.T Durai became CEO of NKF because he was regarded as a man of honor by his assessors. But hey, remember human nature has a great potential to be corrupted.
You need a checks and balances system where people are given an incentive to dig up dirt. Because when those people dig up dirt, they may strike gold. So there is a likelihood dirt can be uncovered earlier. It is a matter of timing and damage control.
Just because there is a track record of choosing the right people does not mean the system is good. It is probably that hell has not broken loose. Sort of like the cliche calm before the storm. And when the storm comes, you want to be able move out.
Asap.
Clara Tan, 15 years old, Dunman High Sch