Abstract
Malaysia practices constitutional monarchy under the Westminster system and parliamentary democracy system. Elected representatives in Dewan Rakyat and State Legislative Assemblies are chosen through the general election of Malaysia by the citizens. Article 10(1)(c) of the Federal Constitution guarantees freedom of association but this right is sometimes misused by the elected representatives to switch their political parties after having won in the election for economic gains, power, a threat with blackmail, or possible prosecution by the state. Some elected representatives also claimed the lack of constituency development funds and the lack of legislative reforms for allocation to justify their party switching. Party hopping is without dispute a clear betrayal of trust of the constituents and immoral conduct that mocks the spirit of democracy of the electoral system. This unhealthy practice has toppled many state governments as well as federal governments in Malaysia for the past 60 years. As a result, the federal government has confirmed that the anti-hopping bill will be tabled during the Dewan Rakyat sitting on the 28th of February 2021. Possible obstacles to resolve in making anti-hopping law effective, namely: (1) there is a need to revisit the Supreme Court’s judgment in Dewan Undangan Negeri Kelantan & Anor v Nordin Salleh & Anor (1) [1992] 1 MLJ 697, and (2) amendments to the Federal Constitution such as Article 10(2)(c), 43(2)(a), 48(1), (6) are also addressed in this paper. This paper further goes on to discuss the differences between anti-hopping law and recall election law in comparison to other commonwealth jurisdictions. It is suggested that the law to govern constituency development funds alongside the party hopping law shall be immediately tabled in the Parliament to keep democracy alive and to put an end to political instability in Malaysia
Ng Choon Kiat, School of Law, Universiti Utara Malaysia
Comments