The Struggles of Democracy in Malaysia

Ong Li Jun

Weeb; daydreamer; aspiring lawyer. With a heart stronger than his motivation, Li Jun's passion in Malaysian politics resonates through his writing and terrible puns.

Introduction
Over the past few years, Malaysia has seen a tremendous shift in political power. For the first time since its independence, Malaysia was ruled by an opposing coalition. Two years later, in February 2020, the Perikatan Nasional coalition was formed and led by the eighth Prime Minister, Mahiaddin bin Md. Yasin. A period of political unrest followed the period of COVID-19 outbreak, eventually leading to the dissolution of Parliament on 10 October 2022, paving way for the upcoming 15th General Election (GE15).
What does this mean for the nation and the people? Is this a sign of the end of democracy as many would claim? Or the start of a democratic reformation?

Underlying issues
To grasp the current position of the nation, it is necessary to start by identifying the key problems faced when it comes to securing a truly democratic position.

1. Gerrymandering and malapportionment
The most glaring issue, perhaps, comes from the composition of the Dewan Rakyat being unrepresentative of its population. This is also known as gerrymandering and malapportionment, whereby electorate compositions are manipulated to give an advantage to a party. The types of gerrymandering range from the unnecessary crossing of local authority areas in different constituencies to the distribution of local communities via electoral boundaries.In accordance with the Federal Constitution, the delineation of constituencies is necessary to establish an “approximately equal” number of voters and “maintain local ties”. However, the Election Commission (EC) has shown unconstitutional re-delineation between 2016 and 2018, allowing for disproportionate representation of population per constituency. There are procedural and substantial failures of the EC such as pre-delineation boundary changes, failure to provide information on changes and information on constituencies, and failure to reduce malapportionment.

2. First Past the Post (FPTP)
The FPTP system is a ‘winner-takes-all’ system that is biased towards bigger parties. How it works is that a candidate who receives most of the votes wins. This is because a party can receive a disproportionately larger parliamentary seat share than their vote share. As seen in GE13, Barisan Nasional (BN) still held a majority in parliament at 60% despite losing the popular vote to Pakatan Harapan (PH) at 47%.
Consequently, FPTP is also vulnerable to gerrymandering, especially in areas where the population distribution of different races is unequal, such as Sabah and Sarawak being BN’s ‘fixed deposits’. In contrast with opposition constituencies like Subang Jaya, Kajang, and Seri Kembangan where there is a higher concentration of voters but only guarantees one seat per constituency, it is unreflective of the choices of the people and puts democracy at risk.

3. Centralised Federalism
As a centralised government, the Federation holds more power than the States. This is due to the Federal Constitution granting the Federal Government legislative power over the States. For instance, Article 75 provides that any inconsistency between federal law and State law allows federal law to prevail and State law to be void. Although Article 76 sets out limits to which the Parliament can legislate on behalf of the State in accordance with the State and Concurrent List found under the Ninth Schedule, this does not allow the individual States to play a more autonomous role. The bureaucratic powers of the States are either more concentrated towards the Federation where they are shared, or federal law reigns supreme over state law where their powers overlap, allowing for the inefficient allocation of resources to the States and the making of unfitting policies.

Potential Solutions
1. Equality of votes: Equality Quota
A direct method to counter the involvement of the government in gerrymandering could be to establish an electoral quota. It redetermines a proportion of voters per parliamentary seat by drawing constituency borders per voter. This was once recommended by the Reid Commission Report and implemented in the Federal Constitution, providing assurance for equality of votes. It was once known as Article 116(3) – (5), listing out the determination of electoral quota for the State and the Federation, before its eventual removal from the Federal Constitution following a series of severe amendments after the Alliance party’s victory in 1962.

2. Abolishment of FPTP system
The disadvantages of the FPTP could be offset with the transition to a proportional representation system (PR). PR works by way of sharing its percentage of votes to be proportional with its parliamentary seats. Although there are many forms of PR systems to be analysed, it would be most effective to refer to a successful model. New Zealand is a common example of a Commonwealth country that made the transition. One advantage of such change was the increase in female representation, such that the number of women outnumbered men in Parliament for the first time. With its mixed-member proportional representation (MMP), it allowed for geographical representation of its citizens and ethnic conciliation.

3. Decentralisation
Decentralising specific powers under the Federal List to the 13 States would provide for more efficiency over time, better planning, and more local involvement. For instance, Sabah and Sarawak should have devolution of power in terms of education, medicine, and health. By allowing the decentralisation with local involvement, the reinstatement of local government elections could be done. Directly electing municipal members to form a local government would provide for a better understanding of the demographic needs rather than appointing State Executive Councillors under the current regime. As quoted from the Athi Nahappan Report: “If democracy is understood by the people at this level and if they participate in its exercise they will understand it better at the State and Central levels.” The Report itself provided suggestions for characteristics and devolution of power for decentralisation, which could be a great starting point for considering any changes.

4. Reformation of Dewan Negara
Finally, the reformation of Dewan Negara should be considered. With a total of 70 Senators in the Dewan Negara, 26 are elected Senators elected by SLA, and 44 are federally appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, providing for an undemocratic representation that allows the appointed Senators to outvote the State’s when conflicts between federal and state legislative objective occur. The shift in power could be done either by reducing the number of appointed Senators or increasing the number of elected Senators. An elected Senator is indirectly elected by the State Legislature; therefore, a change should be made to have them directly elected by the electorate. However, it should be noted that a fully-elected Dewan Negara is not feasible as a long-term solution due to conflicts with its constitutionally embedded purposes, and potentially going against the opposing party in the Dewan Negara when passing legislation.

Conclusion: Acknowledging current efforts
While democracy in Malaysia still suffers from political and statutory issues, it should be acknowledged that efforts have been made toward a more democratic landscape. Undi18 and the Anti-Hopping Law are examples of recent developments. Despite various drawbacks and issues, these are signs of improvement that challenge the previous structure of democracy itself.
The upcoming GE15 should be a reminder that without our participation, we would never be able to secure ‘true’ democracy. Do your part as a citizen to vote for a better change for democracy and Malaysia.

REFERENCES

The Struggles of Democracy in Malaysia

Ong Li Jun

Subscribe to our mailing list