In the field of political science, the concept of gerrymandering refers to \”a conscious effort by the leaders of the political system to move or change boundaries in the interest of winning the next election.\”
A more universal definition by Wikipedia is: \”Gerrymandering is a form of redistricting in which electoral district or constituency boundaries are manipulated for an electoral advantage.\”
The 40,000 people march which happened peacefully last weekend, planned by Bersih, is for a freer and fairer general election and was designed to protest apparent gerrymandering in Malaysian elections.
To really understand the issues, one must first figure out who/what Bersih is.
Below is what the Internet\’s free encyclopedia Wikipedia says about Bersih:
\”Bersih, which means \”Clean\” in Bahasa Melayu is a Coalition of Malaysian Opposition Parties and NGO\’s with the stated aim of reforming the Malaysian Electoral process. Specifically they demand the following reforms:
- The use of permanent ink to ensure that voters may only vote once.
- A clean out of the electoral rolls to remove entries that are no longer valid such as deceased people.
- The abolition of postal votes on the basis that they are easily abused.
- Bersih demands that all candidates and political parties have equal access to print and broadcast media.\”
To my mind the mistake that the government made making was by not listening to the above reasonable and ordinary demands of Bersih. These are not unreasonable demands.
In fact, in the case of the first demand, even the religious authorities in Malaysia has sanctioned the use of the indelible ink saying it is okay \”in terms of cleaning oneself and preparing for Muslim prayers.\”
Why not give an undertaking?
What then is the real issue? Why cannot the Election Commission in Malaysia simply announce that the ink will be used in the next general election?
Secondly, what is the real difficulty for the Election Commission to remove the names of deceased peoples? For a fact, in Malaysia, when a person is dead, the identity card is collected by the relevant authorities and then cut into two pieces, and presumably they are returned to the registration department.
That process itself must and can be at least ensure a 95 percent cleaning up of the register.
Again therefore, instead of seeking to quell the protest with thousands of police personnel, would it not be easier to give an undertaking that if, \”any Malaysian can identify any deceased person still on the list, this error will be cleared within a fixed time period\”.
Postal votes have always been a point of contention. Again, there is also a clear and consistent procedure for postal votes to be registered.
Usually this affects military and police personnel away from home stations. It includes all Malaysians studying or staying overseas but interested to vote. They are allowed to elect as to where they choose to vote.
Usually, they choose where their homes are or where their families are located, if they are away from home.
Again, I fail to understand what is so difficult about publishing all postal voters who have assigned or elected to vote in particular constituencies but who are absent\”.
Once the names are known and their numbers are recorded, it is easy enough for the election volunteers to verify their numbers so that the perpetual claim of \”ghost voters\” does not happen at all.
If there is an open and transparent process for ordinary citizens to verify that fair and free elections are the order of the day, is that not the real modus operandi to improve governance of the nation.
In fact the best thing that PM Pak Lah could have done to quell the threat of the march of 40,000 Malaysian citizens was to say unequivocally and categorically that his government will ensure that the Election Commission would adhere and comply with all three of the above demands; as they are pretty reasonable demand, if one has nothing to hide.
The third world mentality
To my mind, only the final demand which is difficult for the government of the day, as the incumbent, and especially a 52-year old incumbent, to agree is to loosen the reins of the media which they have successfully gained control over the years.
Here it is exactly where we will always remain a developing country with a third world mentality.
In a developed country the more primary and operative value would be fair play and a culture of equally opportunities.
But in any developing economy, the incumbents are corrupted by that very power and such power, as Lord Action said, corrupts absolutely when you have absolute control.
But why should Bersih and other partners in their coalition really be in dismay? BBC, CNN, and even Wikipedia carried a more accurate story of the event last weekend than any the mainstream newspapers did.
Soon enough all Malaysians will get wise to the truth of this fact and matter; that the mainstream newspapers do not tell the full truth on most issues; that there is always a political spin to their articles.
Soon enough many Malaysians are going to find out that media modes like Malaysiakini , which are currently non-mainstream, are the ones who can give an accurate and unbiased account of \”truth, or news and views that matter.\”
In fact for the Bersih march, Malaysiakini gave almost a blow by blow account of the event and in almost real time!
My friend in Beijing SMSed me to inform what was happening as I was on the road from Johore Baru.
Finally, according to Wikipedia, \”gerrymandering may be used to advantage or disadvantage particular constituents, such as members of a racial, linguistic, religious or class group, often in the favor of ruling incumbents or a specific political party.
\”Although all electoral systems that use multiple districts as a basis for determining representation are susceptible to gerrymandering to various degrees, governments using single winner voting systems are the most vulnerable.
\”Most notably, gerrymandering is particularly effective in nonproportional systems that tend towards fewer parties, such as first past the post.\”
Ours is both non-proportional and uses the first past the post system of elections.
Gerrymandering at work
So, what then is there a real problem about the way registrations are conducted, or names are shifted to different boundaries, and \”dead people end up voting?\”
I do not know the answer for a fact. But, allow me to relate two incidents related to me by two different church members, and quite incidentally, because I encouraged those not registered to go and register at the Sunway Pyramid on Nov 15 organised by the Sunway University College together with the Election Commission.
These two cases do not generalise to become the truth of the matter, but neither are they simply incidental, as both incumbent complainants, were moved to another constituency without their specific knowledge.
Both have since gone to review their registrations at the post office and hope to vote where they were registered and want to vote.
The first case involves a medical doctor who was originally registered to vote in the Bukit Bintang constituency about 30 years ago. He voted in Bukit Bintang twice. But he has since moved his address and home to PJ, and has voted in the Petaling Jaya constituency at least three or four more times.
But, rather suddenly to him, his name now suddenly reappears in the Bukit Bintang constituency.
He asked me why and I had no answers, other than to tell him to go to the post office and change his registered voting address.
The unresolved question in my mind is why and how the Elections Commission can arbitrarily change his registration away from PJ to the BB arena. How can they do it without his explicit or conscious permission?
The second case of also another retired company executive who had his voting booth also changed without his knowledge. He tried to get help from two different political parties to make the relevant change, but they could not.
Then, finally he called the Elections Commission and got the right advice. He was informed that while political parties could help him register using a photocopy of his IC, they could not get involved in the change of addresses.
He had to go to the post office personally with IC with the current and desired address, and they will do it for him and the assured him that the change can be affected within a short time.
He has since done his part and is hoping for the new polling booth to be assigned.
The easy way
Based on the Bersih concerns and those real cases I have mentioned above, I need to raise some issues and questions to the Elections Commission before I conclude my concerns about gerrymandering in Malaysia.
My question to the EC is as follows: Why does not the Elections Commission simply register all Malaysian citizens above 21 as voters based on their officially registered home addresses?
In that way two things become evident. First, each citizen has to decide where his legally registered residence is and where he considers his home to be.
After all, even our political constituencies are today framed in geography not by numbers, or other non-geographical criterion. Even our income tax is paid based on these addresses.
Second, authenticity and integrity can always be verified and certified within the neighbourhood.
There cannot be really be non-entities who turn up only to vote at the general election, especially from the land of the ghosts!
All who really want to vote only have to go to their nearest polling booth and make their vote.
All one really needs is to have the political will to decide that our permanent residences of choice also become or locations of responsibility and accountability for citizenship.
To my mind, such a system will also improve the whole issue of representation and systemic integrity of the elected person.
Today there are too many \”bidan terjun\” who turn up in the different constituencies based on party preference and selection but not based on location integrity.
Based on the primacy of registered home addresses, anyone can determine and define where we choose to make our home and the place of our accountability and responsibility; whether to vote or to pay taxes.
Furthermore, if one is a student of Joseph Schumpeter and his theory of creative destruction, and the nature of entrepreneurial spirit in societies, one would be aware that what is mainstream today will only be so without any change or under conditions of stativity.
Creative destruction
The moment there is change, new revolutions are possible. Again, the Wikipedia has this to say about Joseph Schumpeter:
\”Schumpeter\’s most popular book in English is probably Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy . It is in this book that Schumpeter characterized capitalism with the famous phrase creative destruction , in which the old ways of doing things are endogenously destroyed and replaced by the new.\” ( Emphasis mine ).
Therefore, in my reading, what happened in Batu Buruk wherein only a few hundred citizens were involved, and then again only 2,000 lawyers marched in Putrajaya.
Both these were against the advice and directive of the so-called independent police.
This past weekend more than 40,000 people marched for what seems to be a justified and good cause of freer and fairer elections.
Why should the government even seek to stop such an avowedly stated peaceful march?
Resistance of this mode creates even greater desire for change. If the government is not watchful or careful, the next movement of people may be even bigger and greater; for truth cannot be hidden or kept a secret.
Truth has a life of her own, unprotected or uncontrolled by any human person; she will reveal herself at the right times and in the right ways; as the Lingam tapes have so evidently demonstrated.
The authenticity of the tapes is not the real issue; the real issue is whether there is truth of the content?
Despite all the denials, and based on the latest revelation, the main actor himself confesses that it was the Chief Judge on the other half of the line. Need more be said? Wake up Malaysia!
