LAST Sunday we were suggesting to the Election Commission to introduce automatic voter registration so that the four million Malaysians of voting age who are not on the electoral rolls now can vote at the next elections. Almost half a million of those are from Sarawak.
We also suggested that Members of Parliament bring up the matter for discussion in Parliament as soon as possible and see how the federal government would react.
Readers who discovered my new email address promptly reacted: they said my proposals were vague and could I elaborate. Here goes … The purpose of these additions to the electoral system — automatic registration and compulsory voting — is simply to enable so many more citizens to exercise their democratic rights to give their mandate to their legislators and decide who will form the government of their choice. As it is, millions of young Malaysians are being deprived of their full adult suffrage.
It is not impossible to legislate that any citizen of Malaysia upon reaching the age of 21 is deemed to be a registered voter for the purpose of election law. It would not be necessary for an elector to go through the rigmarole of personally filling in forms. This would save public funds from being used to carry out campaigns to register voters.
The present practice to allow political parties to register voters can be abused in the sense that only potential voters or supporters of those parties are registered. Potential floating voters are left out to register with the election office if they want to.
Once a voter is automatically registered in this manner, all that is required for him or her is to produce the identity card at the polling booth, come polling day.
Compulsory voting
For good measure, there should also be introduced a legislation to govern compulsory voting, the automatic registration reinforcing the mandatory vote.
Only then can you say that each and every elector is accorded the chance to exercise their voting rights.
Our country would not be the only one doing this for its citizens. Australia and Singapore are good examples.
The system works there and there is no reason why it should not do as well here.
Malaysia bolehkan?
My guess is that it will work in Sarawak given the fact that most Sarawakians are law abiding and a legislation conferring the right to vote will be accepted, and once accepted the identity card will be kept with a passion.
It is possible to reduce money politics to some extent because every voter must vote, money or no money, on pain of a penalty for not casting the ballot. Initially, it would be wise for the authorities not to penalise the voter and only apply the law if the person fails to vote deliberately for a second time. There would be exceptions, of course. Electors are exempted from penalty in the case of physical disability or insanity.
Revisiting local government elections
This exercise is all about empowering the electorate at all levels of government in order to strengthen and sustain the parliamentary form of government for a long time. Nothing more, nothing less. If we are serious about empowering people, rural people included, the best method is to allow them to choose their own leaders at the grassroots level, which is the local government.
Local leaders are more familiar with localised problems and needs than those from outside the district. Do you expect someone from Katibas to do justice to his appointment as a councillor of the Samarahan District Council unless he is a fast learner in the customs and problems of the locals?
Local government elections were introduced to Sarawak before Malaysia was formed on Sept 16, 1963. We had already in place an electioneering system known as the threetiered system.
Councillors elected at the local authority level competed to get seats in the four divisional councils, which in turn sent the successful councillors to the Council Negri, now known as the Dewan Undangan Negeri. The first Chief Minister of Sarawak, Tan Sri Stephen Kalong Ningkan, came to power through this process.
These elections were abolished when all provisions relating to local government elections in the Local Government Ordinance (Cap 118) ceased to apply to local authorities with effect from Nov 1, 1981 and all councillors ceased holding office immediately.
This was reinforced by the amendment to the Local Authorities Ordinance (Sarawak Cap 117).
Don’t ask me why it was necessary to abolish local government elections in Malaysia when the Athi Nahappan Report 1968 specifically recommended their continuance or restoration. In Sarawak, these can be revived if there is political will. After all, local government is under the State List as part of the agreement by which Sarawak became part of the Federation of Malaysia.
Since both state and federal governments are on cordial terms now, it will not be difficult to get the National Council for Local Government to convene a meeting to restore the elections at grassroots level. Start with Sarawaklah.
The state is supposed to have a representative on that council.
We would be grateful if he would speak up for us.
It’s true that the local authorities still exist in Sarawak but the councillors are nominees of the various political parties in power for a term of years. No study has been made to find out if this variant system has been effective in serving the public in rural areas.
The deplorable conditions of the 7km-road out of Song town to Takan, serving a number of longhouses and many modern houses, could have been maintained regularly by the local council, given the necessary funds.
After the Sg Takan bridge, the longhouse people had to build their own road and maintain it. Instead of waiting for funds from the federal government or the 10MP, surely the local council could have done the job just as well.
It is possible that the council has requested for an allocation to be announced near or released during the election campaign.
Each local council should be responsible for the health of the rivers under its jurisdiction; the rubbish that pollutes the rivers is not only unsightly but a health hazard.
An elected local councillor in that ward would be fighting tooth and nail for funds to keep the road maintained at all times or the rivers clean. Failing to do so may cause his seat in the council. An appointed councillor, while doing his best to get an allocation of funds will not lose his seat for failure to obtain the necessary money, as long as his party wants him there as a representative, effective or otherwise.
Notice the difference? Surely, it’s time to improve or — avoiding the use of the word ‘reform’ — to transform the electoral system by revisiting the venerable local government elections.
Canvassing for support
These proposals are there for anyone to comment on or shred to pieces. They are intended to help nourish the democratic advancement we have so far achieved since we adopted the Westminster model of parliamentary form of government. Though democracy is not the best form of government, yet it works, if we are serious about making it work.
One indication of seriousness on the part of the authorities to transform the electoral system would be to introduce automatic voter registration, compulsory voting and to restore local government elections.
I realise that these changes to the existing system cannot be done before the next state election; that would be asking too much. However, if there is political will, these proposals could be given some serious consideration soon after the polls.
I’m hoping that the candidates in their campaigns will refer to this subject if it serves their purpose; it may become part of their individual platform or manifesto.
For any support of the above suggestions, I would be grateful to them in advance.