PAS’s threat over seats in GE14 holds no water, say legal experts

Constituencies do not belong to individuals or political parties and they cannot dictate to others as to which seats may or may not be contested, says Sri Ram.

PETALING JAYA: The warning by senior PAS leaders to Pakatan Harapan to refrain from contesting in seats “traditionally” held by the Islamist party is an empty threat that has no force of law, a retired judge and a lawyer said.

They said individual candidates need only adhere to constitutional provisions to offer themselves to be elected MPs to the Dewan Rakyat and assemblymen to state legislatures.

Both said all the candidates need to do is to legally persuade the voters to cast the ballots in favour of them to be elected and serve their constituents.

They said this in response to a warning issued by PAS deputy president Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man to Pakatan Harapan, a coalition of four opposition parties (PKR, Amanah, DAP and PPBM) not to disturb PAS seats.

“When PAS seats are disturbed, we are free to stand anywhere, including in PKR seats, Amanah seats and anywhere Pakatan Harapan parties are standing.

“I see a lot of disturbances, like the intention to ‘attack’ Kelantan and Amanah wanting to stand in Shah Alam. We will defend Shah Alam because it was won on a PAS ticket.” Tuan Ibrahim said at the Selangor PAS convention in Kuala Kubu Baru yesterday.

On Sunday, PAS Dewan Ulama information chief Mohd Khairuddin Aman Razali called on the opposition bloc to avoid contesting in 80 parliamentary constituencies which PAS is eyeing.

In a recent video that went viral, PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang said he wanted PAS to govern Kelantan, Terengganu, Kedah, Perak and Selangor, while leaving the other states to Umno.

While stating that Kelantan and seats “traditionally” held by PAS be left alone, the Islamist party urged Pakatan Harapan to focus on other seats.

“We hope our friends in Pakatan Harpan will concede PAS’ traditionally held seats. We have to focus on Umno seats,” Hadi had said.

Retired Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram said any person could contest as an independent or represent a political party provided the constitutional provision under Articles 47 and 48 were complied with.

“Constituencies do not belong to individuals or political parties and they cannot dictate to others as to which seats may or may not be contested,” he said.

He said such a demand was as good as ” writing on running water”.

He said elected representatives ceased to hold office once the legislature was dissolved, be it the Dewan Rakyat or state assemblies.

“In order to return, the particular legislator has to win in the election. Where he or she decides to contest is up to the candidate.

“In the case of a political party, constituencies are allocated to the members to contest,” he added.

Sri Ram said usually a party won power after it had obtained sufficient seats to command the confidence of the majority members in that particular legislature.

He said the Malaysian democratic system was one by which the people (voters) decided who should govern them.

“Party politics is not part of the Malaysian constitutional law but it is part of constitutional practice,” he said.

Sri Ram said, for example, in appointing the Prime Minister as provided under Article 43(2) (a), the King had the discretion to ask an MP to show that he had the confidence of the majority of individual members in the Dewan Rakyat.

“In theory, even an independent MP can be appointed PM if he or she is able to satisfy the King that he/she commands the confidence of the majority of members,” he added.

Sri Ram said party politics was a product of history that originated from England.

“The call by PAS leaders not to disturb their ‘seats’ may be safely ignored. No purpose is served by empty threats,” he added.

Lawyer Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla said the people in Malaysia were very accustomed to elections associated with political parties.

He said it might take a generation to change the mindset of Malaysians from being deeply entrenched with parties instead of individual-based politics.

Haniff, however, said the constitutional and legal framework in Malaysia still recognised that voters would elect their representatives, not political parties.

This, he said, was illustrated in the case of two Semangat 46 assemblymen in Kelantan who crossed over to Umno after the 1990 general election.

“The Federal Court did not nullify the crossovers because it ruled that freedom of association also means the right to disassociate (from Semangat 46),” he added. -FMT