IT looks like nothing has changed in MIC despite the so-called rebranding of the party. For speaking out against party president Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu, Klang division chief P. Thiagarasan, better known as Alex Thiagarasan, was given a show-cause letter.

Thiagarasan had raised questions about Maika Holdings and the allegedly hijacked Telekom shares. Nothing new actually, as other MIC leaders of various ranks have in the past questioned the party over this issue. But then again, neither is the action against Thiagarasan.

Former Maika Holdings managing director Tan Sri G.K. Rama Iyer was told to resign in 1992 following a dispute with Samy Vellu over the shares' allocation. Former MIC public relations committee chairman V. Subramaniam, better known as Barat Maniam, was removed from his post in 1994 for implicating party top leaders in the controversy.

The Maika-Telekom share controversy started in 1992 when Lim Kit Siang, then the DAP secretary-general, claimed in Parliament that Samy Vellu had "hijacked" nine million of the 10 million Telekom Malaysia shares originally allotted to Maika Holdings.

The nine million shares were allegedly channelled to three companies - Clear Way Sdn Bhd, Advanced Personal Computers Sdn Bhd and SB Management Sdn Bhd - which were allegedly associated with Samy Vellu.

The Anti-Corruption Agency began investigations into the case in April that year. Although it subsequently cleared Samy Vellu of any wrongdoing, the controversy has continued to haunt the MIC.

Many are convinced that the re-branding exercise as announced by Samy Vellu cannot take place without settling the Maika Holdings/Telekom shares controversy.

But is the show-cause letter to Thiagarasan merely to shut him up for raising old issues or is this another case of Samy Vellu going after his critics and challengers?

History may be a good guide. Since Samy Vellu became party supremo he has seen away former deputy president Datuk S. Subramaniam from the MIC mainstream and expelled Datuk S. Nallakaruppan for challenging him in one way or another.

Former deputy health minister Datuk K. Pathmanaban was often sidelined from the MIC mainstream for being aligned with Subramaniam as were many other members aligned with Subramaniam.

The late Tan Sri M.G. Pandithan, who was then a vice-president and one-time blue-eyed boy of the president, was also sacked for going against Samy Vellu.

After the disaster suffered by most of the Barisan Nasional component parties in the 12th general election in March, the leadership of parties which fared poorly in the polls has come under heavy fire from disgruntled members.

The presidents of MCA, Gerakan and even Umno have all been taken to task and even asked to step down, but how have they reacted?

MCA's Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting is facing a battle with the Save MCA campaign, set up to pressure him to resign over the party's dismal performance in the general election. There is also the allegation of a snoop squad, allegedly set up to spy on his rivals.

And how did Ong act? He set up a three-man panel of inquiry to investigate whether a snoop squad exists or existed. When the accusers did not like the make-up of the panel, he changed it.

Gerakan's acting president Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon is facing an even worse time, with two party stalwarts having taken up jobs with their political enemies.

Even Umno president and Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is not insulated from criticism and open challenges by party members, some of whom are very far down the pecking order.

Yet, neither Abdullah, Koh or Ong have given any of their detractors show-cause letters.

They are also talking about rebranding their parties.

The leaders also want to stay to right what is wrong with their parties. They believe they have a duty to do that before leaving. It is their right to believe that. It is also Samy Vellu's right to believe that.

But none has taken Samy Vellu's move to sack former Kapar division chairman Jumbo Maniam for questioning the Aimst University accounts and ask another member, a potential presidency challenger, at that, to show cause.

This smacks of continuing a feudal style of leading the party rather than rebranding.

Former vice-president Tan Sri K.S. Nijhar agrees that silencing critics is no longer a viable option.

"You cannot expect to close one chapter and hope that it would not open somewhere else as another person will bring back this issue. You have only removed the symptoms, not the disease."

Unless the MIC top leadership especially Samy Vellu is willing to take criticism in its stride, it may as well change its theme from MIC Cares to MIC Scares, as part of its rebranding exercise.