THERE exists an unalterable consensus amongst Malaysians that go beyond the political divide to put an end to the culture of party-hopping, underpinned by a willingness to come together to explore a long-term solution to defend the sanctity of representative democracy and restore faith in Malaysian elections.
In order to effectively keep party-hopping in check, from a legal point of view, we have two options: anti-hopping laws or recall laws.
Generally speaking, anti-hopping laws act like a sledgehammer against party-switching, regardless of motivations or causations, so long as the parliamentarian is no longer a member of the party he or she contested under, his or her seat is automatically vacated, triggering a by-election. This creates two complications.
One, it goes against the rights to freedom of association, speech and assembly enshrined in Article 10 of the federal constitution; a constitutional crisis is inevitable.
Two, there are many reasons as to why an MP left a party, including both voluntary and involuntary exits. Case in point, an MP could be expelled due to factionalism or because he risks taking a stance contrary to his party leadership. On the other hand, the MP could also choose to resign because he felt there is a lack of room for growth in his party, does not see eye-to-eye with other party leaders, or quite frankly, grown tired of infightings. Should these scenarios be considered party-hopping in the broad sense, and be targeted by the one-size-fits-all anti-hopping laws?
It raises great concerns that under these circumstances, MPs are deprived of both their freedoms of association and speech. Anti-hopping laws would inadvertently become the metaphorical stick that discourages MPs from doing anything that might get them expelled, thus becoming a target of anti-hopping laws. An MP might altogether avoid speaking against the top brass of his party even when it is in the name of justice or the interest of the society, consequently allowing party interests to trump over the mandate of the people. Certainly, this flies in the face of a nation seeking to progress a fair and democratic agenda.
In truth, there are many existing workable models in countries all over the world that we can borrow from to fight party-hopping. There can be no doubt we all equally detest power-hungry and greedy political leapfrogs, and in seeking to put a stop to them, we must not undermine the federal constitution in the process.
Set against this backdrop, MCA has spent innumerable resources to conduct a multi-pronged comparative study into the matter before coming to our unwavering advocacy for a House of Representatives Recall Act in place of anti-hopping laws.
At its core, the Recall Act aims to minimise any possible amendments to the federal constitution, to safeguard freedom of association and speech, and most importantly, to empower the electorate and strengthen representative democracy.
Our rationale is that MPs are elected by their respective constituencies, and in the event where an MP has exited their party, either through expulsion or resignation, or decided to join another political party, the mandate should be returned to the hands of the people who elected him/her in; they get to decide if the MP should stay or go.
As such, it is MCA’s firm stance that the Recall Act is the better course of action to curb rampant defections, uphold the principles of representative democracy and defend the natural rights to freedom of association. It is, therefore, our sincere hope that Malaysians could lend us their support to culminate bipartisan accord to enact recall laws. – The Vibes, March 30, 2022
Datuk Chong Sin Woon is MCA secretary-general
