Written by Sinar Daily, Wong Chin Huat
'Focus on strengthening Anti-Party Hopping Act rather than new law'
There is no need for the government to create a new act to prevent attempts to change the government before the end of the administration term, as the Anti-Party Hopping Act has already been formulated in 2022.
Instead, Bersatu Supreme Council member Datuk Rosol Wahid believed that the government should improve the Constitutional (Amendment) Bill (No. 3) 2022 related to the prohibition of MPs switching parties or the Anti-Party Hopping Act, which was known to have several shortcomings.
He said that the introduction of the Anti-Party Hopping Act was sufficient to ensure that efforts to change the government outside of elections can be prevented, provided that any loopholes in the act, including actions by an MP changing support in the Dewan Rakyat without leaving the party, can be rectified.
"It is better for us to address the weaknesses of the existing Anti-Party Hopping Act rather than drafting a new law.
"I believe such a step might give rise to various new problems, including the perception of an anti-democracy government and practicing an iron-fisted rule," he told Sinar.
READ ALSO: UK's Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022
Yesterday, Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, who is also the Umno president, urged the drafting of a bill to ensure the completion of a full five-year term by any government.
He stressed the need to prevent political instability and any efforts to overthrow a sitting government before its mandated term concludes.
Zahid referred to the challenging period of multiple leadership changes during the 14th Parliamentary term, describing it as detrimental to the nation, causing hardship to the people and the economy.
While government parliamentarians supported the proposal, Pas secretary-general Datuk Seri Takiyuddin Hassan labeled it a desperate attempt to cling to power.
Anwar can eliminate SD 'moves' without delay⋅
From Jakarta, London to Dubai, the non-stop “moves” are frustrating the government, investors, and Malaysians who want political stability.
The key to these “moves” is not just the intention to bring down Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s coalition government but, like the Sheraton Move, is about collecting statutory declarations (SDs) and going to the palace.
The shadowy nature of SDs allows the opposition - including former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Warisan president Shafie Apdal, and Anwar between the Sheraton Move and the Ismail Sabri Yaakob administration-Pakatan Harapan memorandum of understanding - to continuously boast about numbers that they don’t have.
Hence, all these “moves” can be stopped by ruling out SDs as a form of determining the government’s majority by a simple measure: a Fixed-Term Parliament Act (FTPA).
Anwar has the power to do it, and he should do it without delay, adhering to the call by his deputy Zahid Hamidi.
Defining the loss of confidence
Our Federal Constitution is a document written for gentlemen and ladies, thus allowing less gentlemanly characters in politics to exploit ambiguity and silence in its provisions, in particular, those related to government formation and dismissal.
Article 43(2)(a) reads, “The Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall first appoint as prime minister to preside over the cabinet a member of the House of Representatives who in his judgment is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the members of that House.”
Article 43(4) reads, “If the prime minister ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the House of Representatives, then, unless at his request the Yang di-Pertuan Agong dissolves Parliament, the prime minister shall tender the resignation of the cabinet.”
Without spelling out the method to determine the emergence and loss of confidence in a government, this opens the door for SDs as a method, to be precise, only after the 2009 Perak Constitution Crisis.
In 1966, the Tunku Abdul Rahman government attempted to unseat the outspoken first chief minister of Sarawak, Stephen Kalong Ningkan, using SDs but this was overturned by Chief Justice of Borneo, Justice Harley, on the ground that only the State Legislature has the power to dismiss a chief minister.
(No-)Confidence votes in the house remained the only way to overthrow a sitting government remained the rule until a Federal Court five-member bench led by judge Alauddin Mohd Sheriff affirmed in 2010 the use of SDs in Perak.
No ‘moves’ possible with no-confidence votes
SDs are really what enables all these shadowy moves, not the right of MPs to express their loss of confidence in a sitting prime minister.
A no-confidence vote means that those jumping MPs would have to show their hand and they can be easily punished.
In January 2023, Umno amended its party constitution (Clause 20.11) such that any parliamentarian or state assemblyperson would cease to be a party member, hence losing their legislative seat under the Anti-Hopping Law (AHL), should they join any coalition that Umno is not part of.
Before GE15, DAP and Amanah also similarly amended their constitution for any lawmaker to automatically lose their membership, hence their seat under the AHL, should they defy their party instructions in legislative voting.
Even if all other parties cannot sack their parliamentarians without the party losing their seats, betraying MPs can still be punished in many ways if their parties are in government.
This is why government party-hoppers prefer to use SDs. They can reap the benefits as kingmakers if their plot succeeds and deny involvement if it fails. They either win something or lose nothing. So, why don’t they try?
This is starkly different from when parties make the moves, as elected representatives would dare to go to the House or declare their stand openly.
That’s what happened when Umno lawmakers in Perak cunningly held a motion of confidence in Bersatu’s menteri besar Ahmad Faizal Azumu and then voted against it in December 2020. or when 11 Umno parliamentarians openly withdrew their support from Bersatu prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin.
That Perikatan Nasional dares not to announce the list of the alleged 120 MPs who back the coalition, or whatever number that forms a new majority, like Anwar’s claim of having “a strong, convincing and formidable majority” in September 2020, is the best proof that they just don’t have it.
For PN to assemble a 120-member majority, they need a crossover of 51 MPs from the Madani government’s 153.
It can’t come from Harapan’s 81 and Muda. It can’t come from GPS’ 23.
If Sarawak Premier Abang Johari Openg is interested in helming the federal government, he would have contested for a parliamentary seat.
As the Madani government is making generous concessions to Sarawak, why would GPS dirty its hands to team up with PAS, and risk losing Chinese and Dayak votes to DAP and PKR?
And it can’t come the 13 BN parliamentarians who are already ministers or deputy ministers, and a few others given lucrative posts in GLCs.
Yes, some BN backbenchers may prefer to join a PN-led government, but do they dare to table or support a motion of no-confidence and face a by-election?
Amongst them, Hishammuddin Hussein was best placed to quit Umno and trigger a by-election to test Anwar’s public support before the six state elections, when his Umno membership was suspended for six years in early 2023.
If Hishammuddin lacked the courage when the Madani government was new, what would give him the courage now that Anwar is stronger than before the state polls? If even Hishammuddin dares not force a by-election, who else in Umno dares?
Without GPS or Umno, any move would be just a political wet dream in Jakarta, London, Dubai, or Manchester.
In this sense, PKR’s Pasir Gudang MP Hassan Abdul Karim made the most brilliant counterattack on the Dubai Move by simply challenging PN to table a motion of no-confidence, which the latter expectedly shied away.
How can an FTPA plug the hole?
If Hassan cannot checkmate the Dubai Move, Anwar can by simply tabling an FTPA to exclude SD as a way of government formation, without any constitutional amendment.
This is how it works.
First, an FTPA can stipulate that Parliament must serve its full term. Under the current circumstance, till Dec 18, 2027, making GE16 expected around early February.
Second, the FTPA then provides two exceptions for the prime minister to seek the king’s consent for early dissolution [without affecting the king’s discretionary power to grant or withhold it under Article 40(2)(b)]:
(a) The government having lost the confidence of the House; and
(b) The support of two-thirds of MPs for such a request.
Third, the FTPA then further defines what may constitute a loss of confidence, and limits it to three circumstances:
(a) The passing of a no-confidence motion;
(b) The defeat of a confidence motion; and
(c) The defeat of a budget (supply Bill) in the second or third reading.
With the last step, the political instability caused by SDs would be consigned to the rubbish bin of history.
Will Anwar do it?
Anwar can get it done easily in the March or June parliamentary sessions. FTPA is a straightforward bill. It only supplements the Federal Constitution, not amending it.
Hence, it can be passed without a two-thirds majority needed for a constitutional amendment, which some government backbenchers may withhold their support.
In conclusion, the SD mania can be ended with an FTPA, one of Harapan's promises in its GE15 manifesto titled “Chapter 15 Reinforcing Institutional Integrity”.
It is also a call made in a New Year message from 33 NGOs and 52 opinion leaders, including former parliamentary speaker Ariff Yusoff, two former Court of Appeal judges, former Sabah chief minister Bernard Dompok, two former ambassadors, and five past presidents of the Malaysian Bar.
The ball is in Anwar’s court, not Muhyiddin’s, Hishammudin’s, or Ismail Sabri’s. Anwar alone can decide if the Dubai Move is the last one to distract us from real issues like climate change and economic recovery. Written by Wong Chin Huat
Written by Sinar Daily, Wong Chin Huat
Politics Now!
Comments