THE legitimately elected Pakatan Harapan government lasted barely two years, before being toppled by rapacious political bandits via the infamous “Sheraton move”.

The coup is treacherous and unscrupulous, to say the least. It is the gravest assault to the democratic system of the country.

Those traitors not only betrayed their parties but also the mandate given by the electorate in the last general election.

People are riled up. They feel their votes in the last general election are in vain. If an electoral victory can be thwarted so easily by a handful of political plunderers, why bother busting a gut to vote?

Moreover, all reforms are hobbled and people can hold no one accountable because the current government is not elected.

Thus, we should not shirk our responsibility to restore the legitimate PH government.

However, how well is PH prepared to helm again?

As I am every bit as passionate to restore the PH government as many of you, I think we should spend some time to reflect on our past mistakes. Besides immediate strategy to defeat the malevolent enemy, a profound reflection is equally important to ensure a better version of “PH government” at the helm later.

To avoid interminable arguments, let’s not discuss about prime minister candidate in this article.

Lopsided decision-making

When PH was in power, one of the main issues raised was the mechanism of decision-making. Many crucial decisions, be it PH’s or government’s, were made unilaterally, without sufficient consultation.

For instance, the appointment of ministers apparently did not reflect the will of component parties. The appointment of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission chief last June also caused rowdy debates among the coalition members.

The bone of contention was not so much the capabilities of those candidates but the decision-making process. Some may argue those appointments are the prime minister’s prerogative.

However, such prerogative only means “punca kuasa” (source of power) in administrative term. Consultation and consensus are always the practice in coalition politics, unless the prime minister’s party won single-handedly without other parties.

Besides governmental appointments, some crucial decisions that would affect the coalition gravely were also made in silos. One of those is volte-face in the controversial Lynas rare-earth processing plant. It was not just “another decision”, it was a major electoral promise.

Most PH lawmakers campaigned with the people before the election, vowing to close down Lynas when PH is in power. However, the decision to go against the coalition’s electoral promise was not well deliberated among the PH lawmakers. Even if government’s hands are tied due to contractual obligation or other reasons, the contract shall be made public for the rakyat to judge.

The lopsided decision-making mechanism sapped PH’s integrity gravely. People have lost faith in the coalition because whatever promised collectively could be changed unilaterally.

If PH were to return to power, there has to be an improved decision-making mechanism, head and shoulders above the previous one.

Bad communication, poor responses

In the short period of 22 months, PH supporters suffered immensely because of poor communication of the federal government.

Instead of propagating progressive policies and positive reforms implemented by the PH government, we were badly battered by fake news and hate speeches.

For instance, people hardly talked about free food for schoolchildren but a majority of society were mocking the change of shoes colour. No one talked about the successful restructuring of the mismanaged Tabung Haji, but everyone cried about the lowest dividend in the history at 1.25%.

Time and again, PH failed to respond to fake news instantly. When fake news were spreading like wildfire in social media, the government did little to counter or clarify, as if everything was hunky-dory. By the time PH realised that people’s perceptions have already formed based on spurious information, the ship has sailed.

Worse still, the government was unnecessarily dragged into the quagmire of identity politics. The opposition then has turned the discourse of ratifying ICERD (International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination) into a false dichotomy, pitting Malays against non-Malays.

They have pulled a flimflam by portraying the ICERD will threaten the position of Islam and the Malays enshrined in our constitution. Ironically, the ratification of the ICERD was supposedly a show of determination of the government to eliminate racial discrimination.

Unfortunately, the government’s response was pale. PH failed miserably in communicating the issue with the rakyat, although official media were in the hands of the government. Same failures repeated in the case of the Seafield temple chaos and the farce of Zakir Naik. These mistakes have cost us a government.

Have we repented and learnt from these lessons?

Revisit manifesto and be honest

Last but not least, PH should start revisiting the manifesto before lunging into the government again. PH was voted in as government partly because of reforms that we have promised in our manifesto.

However, people had a bad experience with the short-lived PH government in implementing its own manifesto. Some were due to poor communication, most was PH going back on its own word.

One vivid example is Lynas, then key official appointments to be affirmed by Parliament, limit tenure of prime minister to two terms, so on and so forth. People’s trust in PH hits rock bottom when leaders started giving lame justifications such as “manifesto is not a bible”, “we did not expect to win when we made those promises”, “difficult to fulfil manifesto without two-thirds majority” etc.

Therefore, if PH were to “re-form” government again, a revised manifesto with substantial and practical reforms should be put on the table.

Utilise the 22 months experience, change whatever half-baked content and present it to Malaysians again, with full honesty. Convince them how “Sheraton move” has transformed us into a better ruling coalition. This is the only way to regain trust from the people.

Otherwise, wresting back Putrajaya with the same old attitude and mechanism is only old wine in new bottles, which will benefit no one except those who are back into their cosy ministerial offices. – June 1, 2020.

* Chang Lih Kang is Tanjong Malim MP and PKR vice-president.      

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.