Saturday, November 22, 2008, 10.59 PM
|
|
Saturday, November 22, 2008, 10.59 PM |
|
 |
Some make an "inclusive" choice of a party which has the support of Malaysians from all communities because of its power-sharing manifesto, or of a coalition of special-interest parties which also enjoys broad support from all communities because their manifestoes are complementary and all communities are protected.
Others make "non-inclusive" choices of a party which appeals to and draws support from one community to the exclusion of others, or a coalition involving such parties.
Unfortunately, a vote for a non-inclusive choice poses a risk to social stability and inter-communal harmony, no matter how noble the party's cause.
It is the management of this risk by those in power, through the use of executive prerogatives and patronage, which is at the heart of the country's political quagmire.
The problem is exacerbated by a natural conflict of interest between the government's perceived legitimacy to manage such risk for all Malaysians and the government's desire to maintain the status quo in order to implement its policies.
Much of today's political tribulation and uncertainty that we are witnessing is a direct consequence of this phenomenon. This will directly affect the country's ability to survive, let alone succeed, in the longer term.
If we seek merely to place the blame either at the feet of the government (for quelling the growth of alternative inclusive parties and stifling openness and transparency in leadership by the use of such tools) or the opposition parties (for creating the destabilising effect by their perceived non-inclusiveness), then we are missing the point.
To get to the root of this problem, Malaysia must urgently address the risk of communal divisions and societal volatility associated with non-inclusive electoral choices.
The answer lies in our willingness to reset our political and democratic framework in such a way that non-inclusive choices are excluded from elections in favour of broadly representative and inclusive political party systems that appeal to all Malay-sians.
This solution comes with a price for all involved, but the ultimate reward makes the sacrifice worthwhile.
I would like to sketch my own views of a democratic model that this country might use in place of what we have today.
Each political party intending to offer itself at an election must be registered as either a General Interest Party (GIP) or a Special Interest Party (SIP).
A GIP would stand on a manifesto that promises to safeguard the general interests of Malaysian society, in priority over any special interests of any specific groups within the party. Examples of such parties are DAP and Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR).
A GIP would not be allowed to participate in elections unless it can prove that it has sufficient support from Malaysians across the key communities.
So, for every constituency that it seeks to represent, a GIP must prove that it has a minimum number of members, with a significant proportion of both Bumiputeras and non-Bumiputeras.
Any GIP that lacks such broad appeal would have to re-invent itself or merge with other GIPs to avoid becoming irrelevant.
A SIP serves the interests of a specific communal grouping and may only participate in an election by way of a Special Interest Coalition (SIC) with other SIPs.
A SIC must also show that it has broad communal support: its member SIPs must have complimentary manifestoes and constitutions which, when read together, safeguard the interests of all Malaysians. All Malaysians must be entitled to be a member of at least one of its parties.
And the SIC must collectively demonstrate sufficient Bumiputera and non-Bumiputera membership composition, as with a GIP.
Ethnic-based parties such as Umno, Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA) and Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC) are examples of SIPs within a SIC, Barisan Nasional (BN).
Religious-based parties such as Pas are also SIPs but Pakatan Rakyat, to which Pas currently belongs, could never be a SIC from which Pas could operate -- given the contradiction in manifestoes and the non-SIP nature of its partners.
Implementing this proposal would almost certainly force DAP, PKR and the more liberal sections of Pas to merge into a single GIP that is broadly inclusive and supported by Malaysians across the board to remain relevant. Members of those parties who are aggrieved by the merger might be absorbed into appropriate SIPs in the BN.
The net effect would be the emergence of stable and broadly inclusive political party systems, competing for votes in an open and transparent democratic environment.
With these redrawn political battle lines, no political choice could be perceived as ignoring or marginalising the interests of any community or segment of society.
For a GIP or SIC to persuade its Bumiputera and non-Bumiputera members to support its manifesto, that document would have to be a moderate yet meaningful policy which is acceptable to all communal stakeholders.
For example, for a policy on affirmative action in favour of Bumiputeras to be acceptable to its non-Bumiputera members, it would have to be crafted in a way that is reasonable and prevents abuse, with other policies developed as a counter-balance to entice their continuing support.
This requires compromise within the party and a willingness to aim for a "win-win" for all.
At first glance, the potential migration of membership might appear to put the parties in a precarious position. But in reality, these individuals cannot hold either party to ransom, because their departure without any good and sound reason will only give the alternative party a better chance to form the government.
To ensure social stability, this proposal also requires the Electoral Commission to determine the ratio of constituencies which are to be contested by Bumiputera candidates and those which are to be contested by non-Bumiputera candidates, with due regard to the population and geography of each constituency.
Parliament would comprise a constant composition of the different communities, regardless of the balance of power between political parties in Parliament.
You could phase the introduction of such an inclusive democracy over several general elections: for example, by allocating a certain number of parliamentary seats that will be subject to this process for the next election, and then increasing such numbers over the subsequent elections, until we have a full inclusive democracy model in place covering all parliamentary seats.
This proposal attempts to create a structure through which inclusiveness of all Malaysians in political party systems, both in substance and in form, becomes a necessary feature of our democracy.
I believe that by doing so, the battle lines will be re-drawn in such a way that political discourse and debate become a source of strength and unity, and not a source of destruction and antagonism.
The London-based writer is the legal adviser to a multinational company. The above article summarises the concept developed in his book, which is published by ZI Publications and is available in major bookstores. He can be contacted at the book's blog address, resetbook.wordpress.com/
|
|
 About NST | Contact Us | Advertising | Subscribe Online | Privacy Policy | How To Get There |
| Write to the Editor for editorial enquiry or Sales Department for sales and advertising enquiry. Copyright © 2008 NST Online. All rights reserved. |
