IMAGINE one day you pass by a restaurant and look at the displayed menu. Finding it interesting or satisfied with the selection on offer, you walk in and place an order.

But later, you find out that the dishes served are different from the ones you have ordered. You ask, why like this? According to the restaurant, the menu only serves as a reference and insists you pay for the dishes ordered. How will you feel?

Feeling cheated – I assume this will be a common response.

A political party’s manifesto is more or less like the restaurant’s menu, which promises what it can do and will do.

Some say an election manifesto is akin to a political party’s sales brochure in that what is written there is with the primary aim to win popular votes. The politicians will even dare to say out loud what is in the manifesto, promising this and that.

However, these manifestos never reflect the diverse voices in society who they want to represent, especially the vulnerable and marginalised minority communities (worse, if the groups have limited electoral power to influence the election outcome).

In the past, the persons in charge of drafting the election manifesto seldom consulted with the wider public or experts. Who are the writers behind the manifesto? They are never named.

Prior to GE14, the Pakatan Harapan (PH) manifesto drafting mechanism involved one representative from each of the four component parties. They discussed and negotiated for each party’s needs before combining force to complete the manifesto.

Barisan Nasional’s manifesto obviously relies on the civil servants, extracting and compiling the short and medium targets from each ministry before they are mixed and turned into the final draft. Nothing too exciting or surprising.

While PH won, many of the elected representatives and even senior leaders of the ruling coalition parties were not too familiar with the details of the manifesto.

This happened to PH chief Dr Mahathir Mohamad. He thought that the prime minister could not hold the finance minister portfolio only but also that of other ministries including his preferred education minister position.

Regarding the manifesto, the public probably remember well that Dr Mahathir once said the “manifesto is not a bible”. He simply brushed aside the responsibility of fulfilling the manifesto’s promises.

For a year and a half after the Sheraton Move, the country was embroiled in political instability. Recent development shows that despite Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin being embattled and defiant, there is no place for him to hide the signs of his dysfunctional and failing government.

Talk on the street is that the Perikatan Nasional government and the current political stalemate can hardly sustain until 2023 when parliament has to be dissolved at the latest.

If it were not for the worsening pandemic situation, most likely there will already be a general election.

When the pandemic is relatively under control, it is believed that this will be held by the year’s end or beginning of next year.

The people’s perception towards PH, Perikatan Nasional and Barisan Nasional has shifted since the last general election. At this moment, it is hard to predict which coalition will win and govern, or how much will the voters’ turnout be or even how many spoiled votes will be cast.

A PH leader once said that they have learned good lessons from the previous election manifesto. He analysed and was convinced that the manifesto was “too detailed”, never thinking that they could win.

These detailed promises instantly become a burden for the PH government. People’s initial expectation had never been that high, and many promises made in the manifesto had “tied up” the coalition. If they couldn’t fulfill the promises, they will disappoint and alienate their supporters, further denting PH’s reputation.

The leader said that PH will not make the same mistake again, seemingly hinting that PH will not dish out a detailed manifesto like before. So, it turns out that some political parties now also agree with the popular saying, “If you are serious, you’ll lose”.

After going through the period of political instability, economic disaster and the pandemic, should the people still passively accept the sweet promises by political parties in their election manifesto come next election?

Besides voting to express popular will (but indiscriminately for issues), why don’t civil society take the initiative to directly raise the rakyat’s own diverse voices? The rakyat are no longer satisfied simply being represented and then ignored. 

The rakyat need to make concrete demands, something which could serve as the reference for the political parties where they must carefully listen to and consider taking up the issues.

No doubt our society is diverse. If every little voice and demand from the individuals and organisations were to be included, then the political party has to formulate their own “menu” to persuade the targeted voters that they will promise to do what is expected of them.

The “menu” should not be altered after winning because that would be deemed to be dishonest, an act of shifting goal posts.

If political parties cannot keep their manifesto promises, that is not the spirit of democracy. It basically reflects either their poor planning (or tendency for over-promises) or a superior mentality that they can decide things anyhow they like as they are in power.

The mentality may also reveal contempt rather than a genuine belief in democracy where the people are the real masters.

I believe there is no shortcut to democracy. If civil society fails to retain independence and is too reliant on political parties or power holders to deliver reform goals, then the rakyat will be taken for a ride again. 

Civil rights activists should always remind themselves about their original convictions. They should not be mesmerised by the powerholders and get distracted by serving some other interests instead.

The well-being and important policies for this country should not be decided by a handful of unknown writers behind the political parties. We bore witness to their unwillingness to assume the responsibility of fulfilling their promises soon after they won the votes and the mandate in the last general election.

Now is the time for the people to express themselves and make their voices loud and clear. People have ideas. Policies cannot be monopolised by politicians.

People should have their own manifesto. They should tell the politicians to stop counting the number of seats but start working on the policies that matter to the people.

The rakyat can then choose their representatives according to their own manifesto. This should set a new norm. – August 9, 2021.

* Lim Chee Han is a founding member of Agora Society and a policy researcher. He holds a PhD in infection biology from Hannover Medical School, Germany, and an MSc in immunology and BSc in biotechnology from Imperial College London. Health and socioeconomic policies are his concerns. He believes a nation can advance significantly if policymaking and research are taken seriously.

* 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.