RECENTLY, a statement by a prominent politician claimed that the act of party-hopping is for the public’s benefit, not for the individual politician. It was also added that the act of party-hopping has been a norm for years in the political landscape.
These claims made by the politician goes against the integrity of our democratic process and undermines the mandate of the people. In fact, the politician failed to explain how the act of party-hopping was in the interest of the people, when it goes against the voters’ trust and has eroded the confidence of the voters towards the democratic process.
The act of party-hopping in the eyes of the people is tied to allegations of money politics or selfish calculations such as for power, position and personal interest – which is certainly not for the public’s benefit.
MPs represent the voice of the people. When voters cast their vote, the candidate becomes the repository of trust for the voters. In a fair democracy, the trust of voters must be preserved and the principle of democracy must be upheld.
Looking back, Malaysian politics have been in turmoil since 2020, and the continuation of this concerning trend poses a serious threat to our democracy. Voted MPs switching political allegiances have considerably contributed to the political upheaval, and Malaysia cannot afford another federal or state government collapse due to party defection.
More instances of party hopping have emerged over the last few years, with the practice reaching new heights following the 14th general election, with as many as 39 MPs switching sides.
Ultimately, rampant party hopping resulted in the infamous Sheraton Move in 2020, which led to the fall of the Pakatan Harapan government after only 22 months in power. Where ethics has failed to deter such nefarious acts of betrayal, the law has to step in for the sake of political stability.
Hence, we published a policy paper outlining the crucial need for several constitutional amendments to prevent party-hopping, based on the advice of Prof Datuk Shad Saleem Faruqi, constitutional expert and holder of Tunku Abdul Rahman Chair at the Faculty of Law, Universiti Malaya.
With the aim to balance the freedom to associate with the need to honour the trust and mandate of the people, we humbly recommend the following main constitutional amendments, among other recommendations in our paper:
1. Insert after the word “Parliament”, the words, “and, for the purpose of an anti-defection law, the State Assemblies” in Article 10(2)(a) to allow the states assemblies autonomy to craft and construct their own anti-defection laws, nullifying the Nordin Salleh decision on this point.
2. Amend Article 10(2)(c) to redefine the term “morality”. Insert after the word “morality”, the words including “political morality” to bypass the verdict of the Federal Court in Nordin Salleh that confined “morality” to only “sex morality”. A betrayal of trust by switching to another political party after being voted in must be considered a form of “political morality” under the federal constitution.
3. Amend Article 48(1) by inserting after clause (f) a new clause(g), “that having been a candidate of a political party or coalition or using the symbol of a political party or coalition and elected to the House of Representatives as a candidate of the political party or coalition, he resigns from that political party or coalition or crosses the floor” to disqualify a member of either Parliament House if an act of defection from his political party takes place, or acts in betrayal of the party and coalition symbol which he stood for, or if an independent candidate decides to join a political party or coalition after being elected.
This is because it is a betrayal of the voters’ mandate, who associate their vote with that particular party or coalition logo. Also, this will remove any ambiguity in determining the MP’s party affiliation whether as members of a coalition or party.
4. Amend Article 48(6) to remove the five-year disqualification from members who resign from their seats. Party hoppers should be required to resign but allowed to re-contest at a by-election to seek a renewal of their mandate. This will achieve a balance between the freedom to associate and the need to honour the mandate of the voters.
5. Mandate the state assemblies to have an anti-defection law through a federally enabled system, which empowers the states to choose its form and mechanism.
Imposing the same federal anti-defection law on all states is not optimal, as the state cannot change track without another amendment to the federal constitution if the imposed anti-defection law does not work at the state level for whatever reason.
In other words, state assemblies should be given the autonomy to fashion their own anti-defection laws to better suit the context and needs of the state.
Nevertheless, these constitutional amendments cannot single-handedly restore morality to our political processes.
Beyond the anti-defection law, we also need additional mechanisms to be put in place for greater political stability and accountability, which include:
1. Legislating an Equal or Equitable Constituency Development Fund Act;
2. Tabling and passing the Political Financing Act;
3. Limiting the number of cabinet posts;
4. Prevent the use of remunerative posts as an incentive for party-hopping; and
5. Addressing the allegations of selective persecution through institutional reform of the Attorney-General’s Chambers, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, and Inland Revenue Board.
We hope that these legislative and institutional reforms will be considered and implemented as soon as possible, as there is no better time to address the political instability that we are facing.
Though we may not see the fruits of all these reforms in our lifetimes, let us continue to advocate for greater political stability and enhanced accountability for future Malaysian generations. We should never settle for the notion that party-hopping by irresponsible politicians is for our benefit as Malaysians. – The Vibes, May 14, 2022
Farah Ilyana Mohd Anuar and Simraatraj Kaur Dhillon are research and advocacy analysts, and Benedict Weerasena is research director of Bait Al Amanah
