Disbanding tribunal, trivialising public interest


Mustafa K. Anuar

It is of public interest and national importance that these commissioners are brought to justice, no matter the fact that they resigned prior to being tried. – The Malaysian Insight file pic, May 25, 2019.

IT is very disconcerting to learn that the tribunal that was to investigate the alleged misconduct of former commissioners of the previous Election Commission during the last general election, has recently been disbanded.  

It is disturbing because Malaysians in general have had to face a number of electoral woes over the years that made them feel rather short-changed as a result.

These range from gerrymandering, which was allegedly stacked against the interest of the then opposition and voters, to alleged phantom voters and unequal access to the media in the run-up to the general election, among other practices considered fraudulent.

Such alleged misconduct meant that voters were robbed of a free and fair election that is so crucial in a democracy such as Malaysia.

It is through the ballot box that voters get the opportunity to express their collective choice and make their preference known about who is to run the country in a transparent, fair and democratic manner.

In other words, the outcome of electoral competition in a democracy very much hinges on electoral integrity, for only with integrity can democracy be served and further reinforced.

The outcry for the setting up of such a tribunal in the first place was made on the wave of public discontent over the (mis)conduct of the previous Electoral Commission.

Hence, it is indeed of public interest and national importance that these commissioners are brought to justice, no matter the fact that they had resigned prior to being tried.

In fact, such resignations now appear to be a convenient escape route, which is yet another disturbing factor.

Equally worrying is that the decision to disband the tribunal would give the wrong signal to future commissioners and other civil servants that resigning prior to the end of one’s term (or even after one’s tenure) would help one escape a trial – and not hold one accountable for their actions or inactions.

It is, therefore, not mere academic exercise – as insisted by the head of the disbanded tribunal – to bring these past commissioners to justice because people want to know how they discharged their important duties that are enshrined in the federal constitution.

Additionally, Malaysians would also like to know to what extent the electoral process was distorted by the alleged misconduct of the previous commissioners and what the loopholes in the present electoral law, if any, need to be plugged.

To move forward – and we are sure that the current commissioners are very much in this spirit – we need to learn what mistakes were committed in the past so that these mistakes are not repeated, especially at the expense of the voting public and democracy.

It is also crucial to ascertain whether further mechanisms are needed – after learning from the past mistakes – to ensure that the independence of the Election Commission is intact so that the vested interests of the incumbent do not easily get in the way of free and fair elections.

Malaysians need this closure. For, a flawed electoral process can also translate into a taint on the image of the Election Commission and, of course, a blemished democracy. – May 25, 2019.


Sign up or sign in here to comment.


Comments


  • Really "tak masuk akal" how the wrongdoings of the past (this cannot be denied as the wrongful acts are so stark) can become "academic" matters after the wrongdoers resign thier posts before they are charged! Such a conclusion reflects naivety of the tribunal and not an intelligent decision. It's like saying there is no point in charging someone for corruption after he has resigned. Is this the correct law? So, is the message that persons in authority can commit corruption and amass wealth and then resign quickly and enjoy the fruits of their corruption without having to face the law?

    Posted 7 years ago by Ravinder Singh · Reply

  • Go by the tribunal logic, since pekan lanun is no longer the PM then he should not be investigated. It's academic too! What kind of bullsh*t the tribunal members were trying to conveyed?

    Posted 7 years ago by Chee yee ng · Reply

  • Go by the tribunal logic, since pekan lanun is no longer the PM then he should not be investigated. It's academic too! What kind of bullsh*t the tribunal members were trying to conveyed?

    Posted 7 years ago by Chee yee ng · Reply