FOR quite some time now there have been strident calls for an anti-party hopping law to be passed  to prevent MPs and state representatives from jumping ship for their own selfish reasons. Tabling the anti-party hopping law in parliament was one of the conditions in the reform MOU signed between the government and the opposition. 

This issue is complicated at best. Even the courts uphold the principle of freedom of association enshrined in the constitution as sacrosanct and will refuse to judge on this controversial and contentious issue. 

If an MP wishes to join another political party or turn independent, it will be difficult to make them give up their seats as there is no legal bond between the party and the member.  

Differences of political opinion can be a justifiable and valid reason for members to leave a party. The courts cannot interfere in the matter.

It is also more complex and totally different matter if a large group of MPs citing dissatisfaction or lack of confidence in the leadership leave the party as was the case in the Sheraton Move, which saw a large chunk of MPs from Bersatu and PKR leave Pakatan Harapan to form Perikatan Nasional.

The reason for the defection that some members of Bersatu did not agree with what was happening in Pakatan Harapan. This was a classic case of party-hopping and the complexities and complications of anti-party hopping laws can be learnt from this episode when drafting preventive laws.

Even though many in Malaysia did not agree with the defections, it was a perfectly acceptable situation that has occurred in many countries. A party or a group of legislators can withdraw support for a coalition if they feel that they are against what the coalition stands for.

Voters cannot do much about this. It is one faction against the other. A wide range of issues concerning the election manifesto, socio-economic and political problems, aspects of administration and more could end be contentious among the members which could destabilise a coalition.

Parties may group together to win an election but there is no guarantee they will stick together for the entire term. The voter here does not have much of a choice and can only look on helplessly as he has not the means, legal or otherwise, to compel the MPs in any way. How can they be prevented?  Will it mean numerous by-elections will this not further destabilise the political situation? Will this not distract the people and government from focusing on greater socio-economic priorities?

Malaysia now has many small parties and it will be a risk for the ruling coalitions to antagonise them as they can leave anytime and thereby bring down the government, especially so when the government has a slim majority. The lure of money or other means can be strong and parliamentarians and state representatives could be tempted to leave.

Let us consider a situation where Party A (government) has only a three-seat majority and the opposition, Party B wants to grab power. Party B uses money, influence or patronage to lure a few MPs from Party A , who may have won elections in their constituencies with slim majorities. Will Party A be eager to stand in a by-elections in these seat knowing the risk of losing? It must be noted that the defecting MPs are not going to contest the by-elections. Under these circumstances of what use or benefit is the anti-party hopping law to Party A ?

Coalition governments are here to stay, here and all over the world, as the days of monolithic parties dominating the government are over. Nowadays parties focus on or specialise in certain issues to gain the support of the people. 

In a proportionate representation system, as practised in Western Europe, even small parties focusing on certain issues have a reasonably high number of MPs, who could be a force to be reckoned with in a coalition government. 

It must be noted that before the arrival of political parties, there was a system of elected individual legislators who deemed themselves independents, and party hopping was unheard of. If at all an anti-party hopping bill becomes law, it may be more of a preventive than a corrective measure. Preventive, in the sense that any MP or assemblyman wanting to jump ship might think twice of the moral and ethical implications. That’s all. No law can stop party hopping as freedom of association is enshrined in the constitution. It will be better if all politicians and leaders practised more  principled politics for the betterment of the country. – April 2, 2022.

* V. Thomas reads The Malaysian Insight.

* 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.