THE recently-concluded 14th general election (GE14) certainly provided hope to Malaysians who have been pursuing change over the years. 

Besides political parties, there are many civil society and social movement groups, or whatever we want to call them, who contributed towards this new Malaysia, and this should not be overlooked. They have been fighting for social justice, rights and democracy against pushbacks from the past regime, but with our new environment, what does the future hold for them? 

Some of their leaders are now within the Pakatan Harapan (PH) government either at federal or state level. Can these elected representatives represent their voices? How can these groups play their role effectively with their long-time, experienced leaders leaving for the government? These are intriguing questions, although it is premature to speculate without considering some important changes in the external and internal environments with regards to the said groups. Moreover, it is also vital to understand how these changes have affected the groups and the nature of their work. I personally believe that the future of these civil society movements is dynamically evolving and broadly expanding. In order to survive, they must change their roles and relationships.

Bersih 2.0 is perhaps the first social movement in the list. From a successful coalition of leaders from civil society movements and opposition political parties when it was first launched in 2006, the movement had transformed into a fully non-partisan and social activists-led pressure group. With former chairs Ambiga Sreevenasan and Maria Chin Abdullah having left the scene, Bersih 2.0 under the leadership of Shahrul Aman, must ensure that the demands for free and fair elections are met by the PH government. Bersih 2.0 shall not be overshadowed by their previous leaders, and election reform must be continuously implemented regardless of who is in charge. True to the spirit, in a recent statement n response to the prime minister’s announcement on allocations to individual MPs for development of their respective consituencies, Bersih 2.0 reiterated the need for fairness in the government’s treatment of both government and opposition MPs. Bersih 2.0 insisted that the more fundamental underlying issue was the accountability and transparency of the allocation’s spending, which must be enforced on all MPs across the board. In parallel, Maria Chin who is now the Petaling Jaya MP, and Ambiga who is on the Institutional Reform Committee, must ensure that they remain independent,  steadfast in their principles, and be aware of the limitations they now face by being in public service.

Some social movements have taken central stage in the delivery of public services, particularly in health, education, social mobility, and welfare. In the past, for example, soup kitchens that offered food to the hungry and homeless in Kuala Lumpur, such Dapur Jalanan, were perceived as undermining the government. Rather than insist on maintaining the currently inadequate and increasingly ineffectual state-monopolised arrangement, the PH government should embrace the new reality, especially for the delivery of such services to isolated and marginalised communities. On the other hand, social movement groups should deliberately and systematically work in partnership with the government so that there is minimal redundancy and maximal synergy; and increase their advocacy works and capacity-building via education. They are certainly best-placed to increase our citizens’ awareness of their rights and to encourage them to keep holding primary actors such as the government, ministers and MPs accountable to the people. 

To play a more significant and effective role, civil society groups should proactively act as negotiator, mediator, watchdog, validator, and to promote innovations that encourage the scaling up of delivery of services vis-a-vis the government. A civil society movement can influence corporate behaviour through continuous, systematic advocacy, as well as establish and validate standards for the government and the private sector to adhere. In Malaysia’s currently very critical phase where opposition political parties are in disarray, civil society movements should act as an alternative people-centric pressure group to check any dominant political block, be it the PH-led federal government or any of the state governments. In that respect, it is imperative that the outgoing leadership acquire or nurture the best talents to ensure the continuity of their current missions, if not expand them.

The future of civil society groups also depends on how effectively they can interact with the state i.e. the government of the day to deliver changes that the market i.e. the people demands. This cannot depart from the three fundamental aspects of political motivation, state institutionalisation, and social aspiration. Civil society groups must also keep the political and social elites’ motivation at a sufficiently high level to ensure meaningful changes are implemented. Finally, civil society groups must participate in state institutionalisation in order to bring state machineries into cooperative response towards realising the social aspiration which are society’s desires and demands in the new Malaysia.

– June 22, 2018.

* Urwah Saari is director at Auspice Malaysia.

* 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.