Level playing field a long way off

Written by R B Bhattacharjee

Friday, 09 September 2011

Constituency development funding is in the spotlight again following the recent report in Sin Chew Daily that the Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition is funnelling millions of ringgit in extra allocations to its Members of Parliament (MPs) in seats that it is confident of winning. The report alleged that in seats where the BN feels it has no chance of winning, the so-called “black” seats, no allocation would be given. On the other hand, seats that are seen to favour BN (“white”) can get up to RM2.5 million per constituency, DAP MP for Bukit Bendera Liew Chin Tong said in a statement. “Grey” seats, where the BN stand some chance would get RM1 million-RM2 million. Liew called on the prime minister to answer Sin Chew Daily’s allegation and make public the spending under the special category in the budget of the Implementation Coordination Unit (ICU) of the PM’s Department, which has a total budget of RM513.96 million for 2011. The DAP leader further alleged that it has been a long standing practice of the BN to exclude elected representatives from opposition parties from access to constituency development funds held in custody by the ICU. In most instances where the parliamentary constituency is held by the opposition, Liew said, the funds are handled by the local Umno division chairmen instead. The PM has been silent so far on the matter, but BN lawmakers contacted by online news site Malaysiakini said extra funds were “normal”, although they brushed aside the suggestion that allocations were increased due to word of an impending general election. If the allegations are untrue, it would be fairly simple for the PM to debunk them by releasing the information about disbursements of constituency development funds to all MPs, whether government, opposition or independent. In the absence of that disclosure, the public must rely on other sources to draw their own conclusions. In this context, it is noteworthy that last October, Sungai Siput MP Dr Michael Jeyakumar Devaraj sued the federal government for withholding funds from the Federal Budget 2010 for his constituency. In his affidavit, the lawmaker from Parti Sosialis Malaysia said he had been deprived of funding for three years of his term, while BN MPs had received funding. Jeyakumar is seeking a writ against the director-general of the ICU and others, to show cause of their authority to exercise discretion to approve and disburse funds from the Federal Consolidated Funds in the Federal Budget. Jeyakumar also wants a declaration that the Special Constituency Allocation must be provided fairly to all members of parliament in accordance with Article 8(1) of the Federal Constitution. Perhaps the strongest reaction to date to the allegations in the Sin Chew report has come from Bersih 2.0, the coalition for free and fair elections, which ignited a mass protest against electoral irregularities with a rally on July 9. In a statement, Bersih 2.0 called the alleged discrimination in parliamentary allocations a “crime against democracy”. It stressed that all Malaysians, regardless of political affiliation or socio-cultural background, should have fair access to constituency fund. “Treating constituency funds as an election tool to induce support is a shameless and corrupt act of misusing public funds, it is an insult to the celebration of Merdeka, as voters should not be effectively forced to vote for a particular party to gain access to this funding,” the statement said. More significantly, the coalition called upon the federal and all state governments — from both BN and Pakatan Rakyat (PR) — to respect democracy and stop the current practices of giving constituency development funds to only their party representatives. To date, neither BN nor PR has come forward to deny or disprove this statement. Nor have civil society groups or the public in general expressed the level of disquiet that would signal that a majority of voters are prepared to hold their elected governments to account on such fundamental principles underlying democratic choice. Although it may be hard for diehard defenders of justice to accept, the democratic process provides ample opportunities for people in power to skew the game in their favour, such as by the selective use of resources to encourage voters to return them to office. The advantages of incumbency are considerable, and can only be mitigated by the vigilant enforcement of the rules of fair play. It is in this vein perhaps that the Bersih 2.0 statement highlighted the need for legislation to prohibit and criminalise all misconduct that blurs the boundary between party and state or which abuses state resources for partisan purposes. In order for the democratic system to remain fairly functional, the concept of a level playing field has to be carefully nurtured at every stage of governance, and not just in the run up to the election. For this to happen, the role of activist groups like Bersih 2.0 in safeguarding the core principles of democracy are clearly catalytic. However, it is a long road that must be patiently travelled before the people at large become sufficiently conscientised about the importance of upholding such principles as accountability, fairness and separation of powers for them to stand up against the unfair distribution of resources. It is certain that the public will have to live with a stage-managed electoral process until they choose to defend the democratic system against the erosion of its fundamental tenets. Indeed, although the winds of change may look like they have been gaining strength from outside the government’s ranks, they may well be calmed somewhat when they meet the mountains of cash that will surely be splurged on projects for the rakyat before the next ballot.