The Nut Graph
by Jacqueline Ann Surin
by Jacqueline Ann Surin
SINCE
independence, Malaysia has never had a government in power apart from
the Barisan Nasional (BN), or its earlier manifestation, the Alliance.
In this 13th general election since 1957 (GE13), what would happen if a
new government in the form of the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) coalition is voted
into power? How does the transfer of power happen? And what conventions
determine the swearing in of a new prime minister, who will presumably
be Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, should PR capture Putrajaya in GE13? The Nut Graph asks constitutional lawyer Tommy Thomas.
TNG: After the elections are over, how does the transfer of power happen should a new government be voted in?
We
can expect the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and his palace advisers to be
following the results of the general election like the rest of Malaysia.
Once the results are confirmed that the PR has won the elections, say,
sometime in the night on 5 May, the palace will have to invite
caretaker Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak for an audience with the
Agong to tender his resignation. This can take place as early as the
morning of 6 May. He must tender his resignation to the Agong in the
palace because until he does so, there is no vacancy for the Agong to
appoint a new prime minister.
At
the same time, the palace will also invite Anwar to have an audience
with the monarch on the same morning, after Najib has left. The Agong
will then invite Anwar to be the new prime minister and to form a new
government. Anwar will then be sworn in in a ceremony steeped in Malay
tradition, which will be broadcasted live on TV, as in the past.
The
convention is that the monarch has to invite the person who, in his
judgement, commands the confidence of the majority of the Dewan Rakyat,
for an audience on the morning after the polls. Politicians and their
supporters cannot simply turn up at the palace without such an
invitation.
What are some of the conventions that will ensure a seamless and peaceful transfer of power?
The
transfer of power must be carried out by independent state agencies and
civil servants. These would include all the top civil servants at the
federal level, the secretary to the government, all ministry
secretary-generals, the police, the armed forces, and the palace
administration. They are all meant to be neutral. They must respect the
will of the people at the polls.
For
example, if it is apparent that the PR is winning, you would expect the
police to have contingency plans to ferry Anwar to the palace and
provide him with protection because he would be the prime
minister-in-waiting.
The same
process is replicated at the state level with regard to the chief
minister or menteri besar’s position. This is because all our state
constitutions are written in nearly the same way as the Federal
Constitution with regard to the appointment of the head of government by
the Agong, sultan or governor.
How is the transfer of power done in other mature democracies such as the UK?
In
the UK, in the last week before the polling date, a body of civil
servants arrange to pack up the caretaker prime minister’s personal
belongings at 10 Downing Street and to find the premier a hotel. They
will also find out where the leader of the opposition is staying.
Once
the results are confirmed on the night of the polls, if there is a
change in government, the outgoing prime minister will leave the
official residence and check into a hotel. The next morning, the
outgoing prime minister will see the Queen and resign. The incoming
prime minister will already be outside 10 Downing Street holding his or
her first press conference.
So
there are actually two sets of movers on standby. The point in the UK
is, the new prime minister must already be in residence and meeting
people as the premier from that morning itself.
The
entire process is managed by the civil service and paid for by
taxpayers. It’s all neutral and above politics. That’s how professional
they are. Similar conventions are adopted in India, Australia and
Canada, and there’s no reason why they shouldn’t be adopted here as
well.
When in our history has the transfer of power not been smooth and peaceful?
In Sabah in 1985. After the state elections[1],
Tun Mustapha Harun from the United Sabah National Organisation (Usno)
and his allies from Berjaya ran to the governor’s residence to have him
sworn in at 4am as the chief minister. He was removed on the same day
later because the appointment was illegal. Instead, the head of Parti
Bersatu Sabah (PBS), Tan Sri Joseph Pairin Kitingan, was sworn in as
chief minister.
Mustapha filed an injunction against Governor Tun Mohd Adnan Robert and Pairin. In court[2],
the judge said that among others, Mustapha’s swearing-in was null and
void because the governor was under pressure and was threatened to
appoint Mustapha[3]. This principle would apply at the
federal level to the Agong. The head of state is entitled
constitutionally to exercise judgement quietly, calmly, freely,
independently and impartially. No pressure or threat must be used to
influence the head of state. After all, this is the monarch’s most
important function – appointing the new prime minister.
During
a transition period before the new prime minister, chief minister or
menteri besar is sworn in, who is in charge of or controls government
resources, properties, documents, etc?
The civil servants are supposed to be looking after and protecting these items. What happened in Selangor
after the 2008 elections when state government documents were destroyed
was unlawful. The question is who gave them instructions to do so? If
it was the politicians who had lost, then these politicians were no
longer in a position to give out instructions to the civil service, as
they had just been defeated at the polls.
If
it was the civil servants who took it upon themselves without
instruction to destroy the documents, they broke the law because the
documents belong to the state.
What happens in the event of a hung Parliament, or state assembly?
At
the federal level, as caretaker prime minister, Najib can remain
temporarily in office. If he doesn’t resign, the Agong cannot appoint a
new prime minister.
Over
the next several days after the polls, both coalitions will try to
strengthen their respective numbers in the Dewan Rakyat through
crossovers and coalition building. Throughout this period, the Agong
should not participate, directly or indirectly, in this process. The
monarch must let the politicians sort things out themselves so that he
cannot be accused of taking sides. The palace must be seen to be above
party politics.
At
some point after all the political negotiations have concluded, the
leader of one of the coalitions may say, “I have the majority support of
the House.” And then the Agong would say, “I need evidence to satisfy
myself of the numbers.” This evidence can be letters signed by the
elected Members of Parliament (MPs) or the Agong can ask for these MPs
to be presented to the palace.
The
Agong may also conditionally appoint a new prime minister and direct
the premier to call for Parliament to sit as soon as possible – within
days – so that a confidence motion for the newly appointed prime
minister can be voted on in the Dewan Rakyat. If the vote fails, the
Agong must appoint somebody else and test the matter of confidence again
in the House. This could go on for a while.
And
as a last resort if none of these attempts work, a prime minister can
recommend to the Agong that Parliament should be dissolved and fresh
elections held. The monarch has the discretion to refuse and to instruct
the political parties to continue to try to reach a compromise. A
second general election would be the last resort.
What’s important to remember is that even with a hung Parliament, life goes on normally. In the UK in 2010, during the five days of negotiation before the Tory-Liberal Democrat coalition government was formed, everything went on calmly and normally. Hung parliaments are also a norm in countries like Japan and Italy where there is no government for weeks, and life goes on.
In
fact, there are more examples where governments are formed
post-election, rather than pre-election like in Malaysia. And if there
is a hung Parliament after GE13, what is needed is for the supporters of
both coalitions to act in a patient manner, to behave maturely and
peacefully. There should be no taunting, gloating and demonstrations.
At
the same time, all state agencies must remain neutral and independent.
The only people who should be negotiating at this stage would be the
politicians. Such negotiations should also be secret and confidential.
Only the outcome should be made public.
[1] In that election, held on 22 April 1985, PBS won 25 seats, Usno 16 and the incumbent Berjaya six only.
[2] The judgment is available in Tun Mustapha Harun v Tun Mohd Adnan Robert and Datuk Joseph Pairin Kitingan [1986] 2 MLJ 420.
[3]
Riots erupted in Kota Kinabalu in March 1986 just as the court was
about to make its judgment. Demonstrators, led by Usno and Berjaya, took
to the streets to protest Pairin’s appointment. A majority of the
demonstrators were impoverished and undocumented Filipino Muslims who
were paid to demonstrate. Bombs were detonated and five people died. For
more, watch The Silent Riot.
No comments:
Post a Comment