What did the recent Melaka state election achieve? From the perspective of the ordinary man, not much.
Triggered by four assemblymen who retracted their support for the chief minister on the allegation there were "two lions on the same mountain", the election returned the incumbent government to power, and the alleged same two "lions" potentially back to their same positions on the mountain.
All for the grand cost of an estimated RM46 million in Election Commission expenditure, and at the risk of exposing Malaccans to hordes of politicians attempting to campaign despite pandemic restrictions.
Perhaps the only benefit to the election was that it provided incontrovertible legitimacy to the government, which had previously been brought in through a different set of frogs, sans a state election. The resounding majority with which the ruling-coalition won the elections could also be said to herald an era of stability in the state — provided there are no more frogs waiting in the wings.
The Melaka government has fallen twice since the 2018 state election, making this most recent one its third government in three years. Never again will Melaka be ruled by empires; but, then again, the concept of empire runs counter to democratic ideals.
All these changes of government would not be so bad if the will of the people was being served at every turn. But, when they come as a result of party- or coalition-hopping, it is rarely the rakyat's interests that are being served.
So, it was a welcome thing when the president of the winning Barisan Nasional coalition Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi announced the BN state government's intention to introduce anti-hopping laws as the first item on their agenda. Granted, BN-Melaka has benefited twice in very recent history from the actions of frogs; but, it is unfair to the rakyat, and any leadership worth its salt would put the interests of the constituents before its own.
And since BN holds a comfortable two-thirds majority in the assembly, there should be no reason for not enacting some form of anti-hopping mechanism soon. In fact, given that aisle-crossing is an equal-opportunity game, there should be no reason for any party or coalition at the state or federal level to reject the introduction of anti-hopping mechanisms.
When the drafters of our Federal Constitution included freedom of association among the fundamental liberties for all in Malaysia, they did not envisage that special creature that is the Malaysian frog. And while a representative should be encouraged to act on his conscience, history has now made it necessary for a balance to be struck to ensure that the room for conscience is not used to manipulate the system for personal or political gain.
In this sense, the private member's bill submitted by member of parliament Datuk Azalina Othman Said for recall elections is a very democratic solution, since it gives power to the constituents to decide via referendum whether or not the hopping elected representative stays or has to leave.
Under normal anti-hopping laws, the person loses his seat when he leaves the party or gets sacked by the party. This could thus prevent the representative from exercising his conscience for fear of losing his seat, resulting instead in rubber-stamping representatives.
The cabinet has agreed to introduce laws to prevent party-hopping. That should be done sooner rather than later, and in consultation with all parties.