Arnold Puyok
Sabah politicians have always been driven by what I call as the politics of ‘cari makan’. But before I go any further, let me first explain what the politics of ‘cari makan’ means.
For Sabah politicians, politics is not about understanding people’s problems and turning those problems into policy solutions. These are not in the Sabah politicians’ vocabulary. Politics for them is simply about finding the ways and means to get access to the state’s development resources - often, in order to gain monetary benefits quickly. So, becoming a politician in Sabah is one of the fastest ways to become rich - or an instant millionaire.
When news about a former opposition assemblyperson leaving his party came out, it was hardly news at all – at least for me. This is Sabah! Sabah politicians like to ‘jump’ to ‘cari makan’. The excuses given by the assemblyperson who used expressions such as “for the people”, “for development’s sake”, “loss of confidence”, etc, etc, are not new and have become a cliché in Sabah.
But to be fair to the assemblyperson, he may have a “strong” reason to leave his party. It is his democratic choice to decide his future political direction. It may be argued that his leaving the party was for the interest of his electorate whom he thought might be better served under a more resourceful and financially able party. So, if this is the case, the assemblyperson cannot be blamed. It is the system that forces him to leave his party.
In Malaysia, opposition leaders are often relegated to a second-class status even though they are voted by the rakyat to represent them. The system is seriously skewed in that only elected representatives from the ruling party have access to the state’s development resources to develop their constituencies. This puts the opposition parties in a disadvantageous position - without sufficient financial resources, it is rather difficult to serve the rakyat’s needs satisfactorily.
There is also a question about moral principles of elected representatives. The argument against defecting to another party is that the leader has betrayed the trust of people who voted for him under the party he represented. But it may be argued that voters’ voting preference might be influenced by the candidate’s popularity than by the party’s standing.
So, rather than questioning the moral integrity of the defecting leader, the main issue here is how to increase the accountability of elected representatives so that they will not use their political position to ‘cari makan’. I suggest a number of ways.
First, parties from both sides of the political divide must use the ‘bottom-up’ approach in selecting potential candidates to run in an election. The potential candidates must be vetted from the lowest level of representation such as the village to the highest level of representation in the party. The current practice of most political parties is to choose candidates who are closer to the centre of power instead of those who are closer to the electorates.
It is also important for the potential candidates to appear in a council-type debate. The ability to debate and to articulate issues of public interest is essential to increase the accountability of elected representatives. The final stage of this process is a vetting by an independent body within the party to choose the most suitable candidate to contest in an election. The process of selecting a candidate must be done early and not one or two days before the election.
Second, potential candidates must declare their assets publicly. Assets declaration by elected representatives is part and parcel of a functioning democratic society. By declaring their assets, elected representatives may be discouraged from using the public office to accumulate wealth or to involve in commercial activities in which they may have certain hidden interests. The role of elected representatives is to serve people and not to make money.
Drawing the line on political funding
Thirdly, a law must be enacted to prevent elected representatives from using their political position to expand the business interests of their allies, family members, or other parties with whom they may have certain vested interests with.
The law must also draw the line very clearly in respect to political donation, political funding, campaign programmes, and so on to ensure that elected representatives do no take advantage of those activities mentioned to serve their own personal interests.
Fourthly, the status and prestige of the legislative assembly must be elevated. Assembly meetings should be conducted regularly, and not a one-day sitting as in the case of the recent Sabah assembly proceeding. Assembly debates should be live telecast so that the electorates can assess the performance of their representatives.
Proposed enactments should be pre-debated and previewed before they are brought to the assembly for deliberation.
All this while, most people do not have any idea about what is going on in the assembly. The general perception about assembly sittings is that they are boring, a waste of time, and do not affect the day-to-day life of public. Elected representatives have a duty to explain to the rakyat that the legislative is an important government institution as it is the ‘brain’ that determines the future of the country.
Fifthly, political parties must conduct an empowerment session or a capacity building programme to train their elected representatives.
Most of the elected representatives think their work is done after winning the election. Some spend more time at golf courses, at hotel lounges, and at karaoke outlets than in their constituencies to serve the rakyat.
Elected representatives must be trained how to debate, how to write and evaluate policies, and how to initiate grassroots-level programmes, among other things.
Finally, the government must set up a people’s tribunal as an avenue to lodge complaints against underperforming elected representatives. Most elected representatives regard themselves as “untouchable”, “semi-god”, and worse, a “boss”.
Through the people’s tribunal, elected representatives will be made accountable to the people they serve. It is also an avenue for people to speak up openly and critically about issues which their representatives fail to address satisfactorily.
It is important for elected representatives to have the moral courage to explain to people their every action - including to defect to other party or to become an independent - as in the case of the opposition assemblyperson earlier.
But what is more important is for people to be empowered so that they can hold their elected representatives accountable. People - especially Sabahans - have had enough of leaders who become elected representatives simply to ‘cari makan’. Elected representatives who merely want to ‘cari makan’ are an impediment to the country’s progress. People of all races and religions should stand up and say ‘no’ to this kind of leaders.
0 comments :
Post a Comment