COMMENT | The results of the DAP election are as most expected, as those in office, many of them state warlords with large numbers of branches, joined forces against those who lacked government positions through the use of circulated lists.

Those that rose to the top were on multiple lists, while those on the bottom third fell in rankings.

This piece looks at the results and argues that to understand the outcome, one must see how the heightened role of personal competition and betrayals have been an integral part of the DAP as it has expanded its national role.

Many would say this is “just politics” - and this is true. Yet the dynamic also speaks to a broader shift taking place in DAP, where the driver within the party is increasingly about winning and retaining power for positions - personal standing - rather than standing for principled positions.

Power - attaining it and using it - was on display in the DAP’s CEC elections, a power takeover.