As the de facto law minister, the late Liew Vui Keong was once asked by Kepong MP Lim Lip Eng (DAP) on whether an anti-party hopping law would be pursued by the Pakatan Harapan (PH) government.
In a parliamentary written reply in October 2018, Liew said an anti-party hopping law to deter lawmakers from defecting was not in the works as every citizen had the right under the Federal Constitution to form association under Article 10(1)(c) of the Federal Constitution.
Liew cited a Federal Court case involving the Kelantan state assemblyman Nordin Salleh in 1992. PAS had its own anti-hopping rule then, and when Nordin switched to Umno, the case went to court.
The apex court then ruled that such a rule was void as it violated freedom of association under Article 10 of the Constitution.
But now, politicians from both sides of the aisle appear to back anti-party hopping laws being introduced, saying it would stabilise and improve the perception of local politics.
Lembah Pantai MP Fahmi Fadzil (PKR) and Segambut MP Hannah Yeoh (DAP) are among MPs who have been reported to have backed the new law, with Fahmi warning the absence of such a law could cause citizens to begin trivialising the country’s democratic process which could lead to further hazards or uprisings.
Yeoh meanwhile stresses the importance of an anti-hopping law to instill confidence in voters to convince them to come out and cast their votes.
On the other side of the political divide, Petra Jaya MP and Gabungan Parti Sarawak (GPS) chief whip Datuk Seri Fadillah Yusof – now back as the Works Minister – has also been reported to have said that an anti-party hopping law would put an end to the unhealthy practice.
“We have no problems with the party hopping Act because our culture is not one to hop between parties. This is because to me, party-hopping is an unhealthy culture, and as such support introducing such laws,” he said.
Indeed, lawmakers and party leaders should have no problem with an anti-party hopping law. The Constitution of the Republic of Singapore has a simple provision on it.
Article 46(2)(b) says that the “seat of a Member of Parliament shall become vacant if he ceases to be a member of, or is expelled or resigns from, the political party for which he stood in the election.”
The Indian Constitution has more elaborate provisions in its Tenth Schedule – popularly known as anti-defection law. The law has come into much criticism in recent years, perhaps because it is too elaborate.
Whether the Malaysian law is simple or elaborate, it is time for the law. Former Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin’s offer of an anti-party hopping law to be tabled in Parliament must see the light of day.
Now is the time for a two-thirds bipartisan support from the Dewan Rakyat and Dewan Negara on Constitutional amendments necessary for the law.
*This is the personal opinion of the writer and does not necessarily represent the views of The Independent.
