Balancing stability and democracy via FTPA

A lot has been said about the proposal by Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi to introduce the Fixed-term Parliament Act, commonly known as FTPA. The Act aims to establish a five-year interval for general elections, similar to the current practice in Malaysia, while also removing the prime minister’s discretion to call for a snap election, as practised in the United Kingdom (UK).

The primary objective of this Act is to provide sitting governments the opportunity to complete their full five-year term without the risk of collapsing due to a political coup. Supporters of the government, including Ahmad Zahid himself, argues that this Act ensures political stability in the country.

The backdrop to this proposal is Malaysia’s recent turbulent political landscape, which has seen four prime ministers in the past five years. Unfortunately, the resulting instability has hindered the country’s ability to attract significant investments and adversely impacted the economy.

However, critics argue that the FTPA might not align with democratic principles. While it guarantees the full term for the elected government and prime minister, it raises concerns regarding the legitimacy of their leadership when support dwindles.

Traditionally, a prime minister either advises the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to dissolve Parliament and call for a snap election or steps down from the position if their majority support is questioned. Unfortunately, the FTPA proposed by the UMNO president lacks clear provisions for these scenarios.

From an optics perspective, this Act grants the prime minister unchecked powers, potentially leading to abuses without proper accountability. This raises concerns about the erosion of democratic values, contradicting the promises made by Pakatan and its supporters in the past.

It is crucial to approach this matter objectively, yet proponents and self-proclaimed champions of democracy under Pakatan seem comfortable endorsing the proposed Act without fully considering its potential implications.

Former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, while acknowledging the stability aspect offered by the FTPA, also warns about the risks of an inept government in power for a full term, causing irreversible damage to the country. He questions the consequences if a criminal leader openly misuses government funds and abuses power, or when the economy deteriorates, causing suffering among the people.

Ironically, even during the Mahathir era, such a proposal was never introduced by the polarizing figure.

Senator Ti Lian Ker of MCA cautions that the FTPA could lead to a repetition of the Machiavellian trend from the 80s and 90s, where laws and practices were manipulated, reflecting poorly on the federal administration.

By criticizing the proposal as a “knee-jerk reaction” encroaching upon the Federal Constitution, the former deputy minister suggests that it takes the easy way out by enacting flawed laws.

Unlike the United States system, where mid-term elections keep politicians accountable, Malaysia does not have such provisions. In our system, the prime minister’s confidence can only be challenged when they lose majority support in Parliament, and it appears that the FTPA seeks to restrict even that.

While it is essential to limit horse-trading and backroom dealings, we must not overlook the significance of a legitimate government. Legitimacy is crucial for stability and acceptance by the people.

Therefore, it is imperative to establish a framework within the FTPA that ensures both constitutional requirements and democratic principles are upheld. If a prime minister loses the confidence of the Members of Parliament and this is proven in the parliamentary proceedings, they should be removed from office.

In our pursuit to minimize undue influence and secrecy, we must not compromise on the importance of a legitimate government that upholds the principles of democracy and maintains stability, ultimately gaining the support and trust of the people.”

DISCLAIMER:

The views expressed here are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of the New Sarawak Tribune.