THE decision to adopt the first-past-the-post electoral system was made during independence in 1957 to ensure a stable government.
There are two broad differences between the first-past-the-post system and other systems, especially the proportionate system.
The main advantage of the first-past-the-post system is its ability to provide a strong and stable government, but it is found wanting in terms of democratic representation for the minorities.
The proportionate and other electoral systems, although able to give fair representation for the minorities, normally failed in providing a stable government.
The first-past-the-post system was chosen as it was suited to a country divided by distinct geographical areas, with different ethnic groups and, above all, because the system was simple, practical, easy to count and less confusing to the average Malaysian.
One would agree that if we were to study the single transferable vote in a proportionate system, we will be able to recognise how complicated it was.
With the public becoming more educated on other electoral systems, there are individuals and groups who feel that the proportionate or the multi-member proportionate system (hybrid system) is better and should replace the present system.
Germany, for example, is generally and geographically developed, which poses fewer problems and a proportionate system is practical.
So, we have to ask ourselves if we have thoroughly studied all the systems, their advantages and disadvantages.
There are proponents of the proportionate system who have highlighted its benefits — protecting minorities and encouraging smaller political parties to participate in the democratic process.
There are those who feel that more parties would mean more conflicts and disrupt the decision-making process.
For those supporting the first-past-the-post system, they are of the opinion that the system, despite its failure to represent minority parties, will ultimately bring about a two-party system for checks and balances.
Furthermore, in Malaysia, where the parliamentary system is bicameral, minorities are also represented in the Dewan Negara. At the same time, it will be stronger to make major decisions.
It is argued that the United Kingdom is strong politically and economically in Europe because of this system.
It must be mentioned from the outset that the Election Commission should have no qualms about implementing a new electoral system in accordance with the law passed in Parliament.
In countries where people opted for a particular system, it must gain public support through political representatives (the legislature) and later obtain the mandate following debate in Parliament.
There also countries that used a referendum to gauge public opinion and support before discussing it in Parliament.
If after the debate, there is a consensus, the new electoral system will be passed as a new law.
Only when the Election Commission and its officers have familiarised themselves with the new system, will the body be able to implement it.
The commission should consider all the recommendations for the improvement of electoral processes to ensure democratic principles prevail.
MOHAMED MOKHTAR AHMAD BAJUNID
Cyberjaya, Selangor