Share This

Showing posts with label Malaysia's Electoral System. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Malaysia's Electoral System. Show all posts

Thursday, 2 May 2013

Malaysian election: Relooking ideals of democracy, How to casting Your Vote?

The workings of electoral democracy face many challenges that separate the democracy’s virtues from the sordid realities that need to be admitted and rectified.


Transformation Malaysia

IN a democracy, the government must be representative of the people and answerable, responsible and accountable to the wishes of society. Elections are one aspect of this accountability.

Unfortunately, the electoral exercise in all democracies is so colossal, involves so many details, so many people (240,000 workers for the forthcoming elections) and so much money (RM400mil) that it is extremely vulnerable to manipulation and malpractices.

Despite democracy’s undoubted virtues, the sordid realities of the electoral exercise need to be noted and rectified.

A genuinely democratic electoral process must possess the following salient features.

First, there must be in existence constitutional provisions for the existence, composition and tenure of legislative assemblies. These are provided for in detail in our federal and state constitutions.

Second, the electoral system must translate votes into parliamentary seats.

Two main types of electoral systems exist – the simple plurality system and the system of proportional representation. In the simple plurality system, the candidate obtaining the most votes is declared elected.

There is no requirement that he must obtain more than 50% of the votes polled. In a three-cornered contest, the “winner” may capture the seat with only a minority of the votes.

In addition to non-representative outcomes in individual constituencies, the simple plurality system permits a massive disparity at the national level between the percentage of votes polled and the percentage of parliamentary seats won.

For example in 2004, Barisan Nasional won 63.9% of the popular vote but 90.4% of the Dewan Rakyat seats. In Britain in the 70s, the victorious Labour party won only 37% of the popular vote but a working majority in Parliament.

In contrast, in the proportional representation system, parliamentary seats are given to parties in proportion to the percentage of popular votes obtained by them.

The positive outcome is that the legislature is truly representative.

But the negative feature of a proportional representation system is that a large number of political parties join the fray and none command a firm majority in the legislature. Instability, frequent change of government and gridlock result.

Third, democracy requires that a fair and impartial machinery for delineating and revising electoral constituencies must be in place.

Every citizen’s vote must carry equal weight. This means that in principle, all constituencies must be approximately equal in population size.

Unfortunately, if this ideal were to be strictly followed, all constituencies in rural areas, in hilly terrains as in Pahang, and in territorially large but thinly populated states as in Sabah and Sarawak will have very few MPs.

The Constitution in 1957, therefore, allowed a measure of weightage to be given to rural constituencies. Unfortunately, how much weightage may be given is no where specified and wide disparities exist.

The largest parliamentary constituency is Kapar, Selangor, with 144,369 voters; the smallest is Putrajaya with 15,355 voters – i.e. 9.4 times smaller. In Perak, the largest is Gopeng with 97,243 electors; the smallest is Padang Rengas with 28,572 – a difference of 3.4.

Fourth, a fair and impartial machinery for drawing up an electoral register is necessary.

In Malaysia, it is the job of the Election Commission to draw up the electoral register impartially, to ensure that no one is denied the right to vote, that there are no phantom voters or persons who have died, that no non-citizens are allowed to register, that voters satisfy the requirement of residence in their constituency and that no one registers in more than one electoral district.

Fifth, the law must permit universal adult franchise (right to vote). Regrettably, our voting age (21 on the date of registration) is very high. Consequently, nearly 55% of the population is rendered ineligible to vote. We need to reduce this proportion. There is also no automatic registration.

Many citizens are apathetic and do not register as voters. Some who do fail to show up on election day because voting is not compulsory.

We have 13.3 million registered voters who constitute only 46% of our population of 28.9 million.

If one were to deduct those who do not show up, this leaves only 34.5% of the population that participates in democracy’s showcase event! We must find ways to increase this proportion.

Sixth, there must be legal rules for the eligibility of candidates and for the nomination of contestants. These exist in detail.

Seventh, there must be rules about the limits on the powers of caretaker governments. In the case of PP v Mohd Amin Razali (2002), the court provided some guidance. We could also emulate conventions from the Common­wealth.

Eighth, legal and conventional rules exist for the conduct of election campaigns, duration of the campaign period and rights of political parties to reach out to the electorate. Ninth, election expenses are controlled so that the electoral exercise does not degenerate into a battle of cheque books.

In Malaysia, the law puts a ceiling on the expenditure by individual candidates (RM100,000 for state and RM200,000 for federal seats) and imposes a duty to maintain a record of contributions and filing of audited statements of expenditure.

However, there is no control on what political parties may spend or receive by way of donation.

Tenth, the Constitution confers safeguards for freedom of speech, assembly and association.

In many democratic countries, there are provisions for equal access to the media for all contestants. In Malaysia, media monopoly is a serious problem.

The Internet is, however, open to everyone and provides an alternative, though not always reliable, source of information.

In sum, though democracy is the best form of government, there can be no denying that behind the folklore of electoral democracy stand many myths and many utilitarian compromises. Every where in the world electoral reform is being called for. Unfortunately, there are no quick-fix, simple solutions.

For this GE, many improvements, like extension of postal votes to those abroad and use of indelible ink, speak well of the recognition of the need for reform. But the challenges are many and, in some cases, fundamental.

What one can hope for is that as in the past our electoral exercise will remain peaceful and that its result will provide a strong and stable government to lead us forward.

Reflecting On The Law by SHAD SALEEM FARUQI
> Shad Saleem Faruqi is Emeritus Professor of Law at UiTM




How to casting Your Vote?

Check & Print out:
Check on-line first (http://daftarj.spr.gov.my/semakpru13.aspx) and print out your details before going to the voting center. You may be able to by-pass the Barung counter since you have a printout and know where to go and thus short cut your time. 

How to hold your ballot paper? 


Shaken indelible ink: 
Failure to shake the bottles vigorously has caused the ink used for polling to be washed off easily, the Election Commission clarified, referring to several cases during advance voting which are causing a stir in the social media. The EC gave assurance that those who have cast their ballots will not vote again on Sunday. Failure to shake the bottles vigorously has caused the ink used for polling to be washed off easily, the Election Commission clarified, referring to several cases during advance voting which are causing a stir in the social media. The EC gave assurance that those who have cast their ballots will not vote again on Sunday.

Why should we be afraid of Hudud Law? (Must Watch)?


Anwar Ibrahim at Han Chiang High School Penang

Tuesday, 19 February 2013

Who is Nick Zenophon, biased, unwelcome,stupid and impractical?

Biased and unwelcome

Australian senator Nick Xenophon has been accused of tarnishing Malaysia’s image by questioning our electoral process and smearing the palm oil industry.

http://video.heraldsun.com.au/2335953528/Xenophon-awaits-deportation

A LOT of heat is being generated both here and in Australia following the Govern-ment’s decision to deport independent Australian senator Nick Xenophon who arrived at the LCCT in Sepang on Saturday.

He was detained as an undesirable person and deported on the first available flight back the next day.

There is considerable support as well as condemnation for Xenophon’s deportation, with many individuals and NGOs questioning his independence and accusing him of coming here to interfere in our election system.

Those who condemn the deportation say it is authoritarian and reflects the Government’s paranoia of foreign observers.

Just who is Xenophon and what is the Australian’s relationship with Malaysia?

The outspoken senator is a personal friend of Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and one of his many sympathisers in Australia.

He often speaks up on various Malaysian issues and has travelled here several times, the last in April, at Anwar’s invitation to ostensibly study the polling system.

But his critics charged that he is heavily involved in supporting the Opposition and had even participated in the Bersih 3.0 rally in April last year that ended in violence.

Xenophon’s latest trip here was as part of a four-member Australian delegation after the Australian government rejected Anwar’s request for independent observers for the upcoming general election.

Xenophon was deported, said our immigration authorities, because he had tarnished the image of the country. He had been classified as a “prohibited immigrant”.

The fact is immigration had blacklisted Xenophon because he had attended the Bersih protest last year and for allegedly making “baseless” allegations about Malaysia.

“He can’t pretend to be an independent observer as he is very biased,” said political analyst Dr Chandra Muzaffar.

“It does not make sense trying to be an independent observer when he is not. He is a very partial observer and was ready to denounce our electoral process,” Dr Chandra said.

Xenophon had given a press conference in Parliament last year in which he lambasted the Government’s “electoral shortcomings”.

Among the issues he raised was the short campaign period.

He also vocally objected to the fact that rural constituencies had a smaller number of voters compared with urban ones which had many more.

He compared Malaysia’s electoral system, which he faulted, with other countries including Australia’s which he painted favourably.

But it is through his virulent anti-palm oil campaign that Xenophon first came to the attention of our Government.

As Australia’s Green Party senator, Xenophon strongly supported and promoted legislation requiring labelling of palm oil in food products.

Labelling has threatened big plantations and thousands of smallholders equally.

Xenophon promoted the “Truth in Labelling – Palm Oil Bill” which was proposed by environmental NGOs and supported by Xenophon because oil palm plantations, it was said, contributed to deforestation and threatened the orang utan.

The palm oil industry earned the country RM80bil in 2012 and provided hundreds of thousands of Malaysians employment and income.

But Xenophon couldn’t care less.

Eventually the Bill was defeated by an extensive information campaign mounted by Malaysia.

Lately, Xenophon has emerged again on the Malaysian political landscape as a human rights advocate who is concerned with our election laws and practices.

He has allied himself with Anwar and with the Opposition who now decry the fact that he had been deported rather unceremoniously by an exasperated government that at one time had tolerated him and allowed Xenophon free access.

The reality is that many of these battles are actually trade wars waged in various shapes and forms and which are heavily financed by our economic rivals.

The economic stakes are indeed high.

In his own Australia, Xenophon is viewed as a maverick and attention grabber who is into self-promotion.

Australian commentator Greg Sheridan, writing in The Australian, has this to say about Xenophon – he only campaigns for one side of Malaysian politics, the Opposition.

Sheridan also wrote it was “stupid and impractical” for Australia to send election monitors, citing Vietnam and Cambodia, and Malaysia “on any measure is one of the most democratic and freewheeling nations in South-East Asia”.

Indeed, Xenophon has come here on a number of occasions, taken advantage of our openness and had even engaged in grandstanding – not just in Parliament but also on the streets.

He has lost our goodwill and made himself persona non grata.

COMMENT By BARADAN KUPPUSAMY, The Star/Asia News Network

Related Stories:
Xenophon's 'foolish' episode slammed
Guan Eng: Deportation disgraceful and unacceptable
Xenophon not on list of Aussie delegation