Yoursay: Don’t forget to reform the Senate as well

YOURSAY | ‘This is an opportunity for Pakatan Harapan to take a revolutionary step.’

Dewan Negara's role in a changing political landscape

David Dass: It is time to rethink the role of the Senate.

In the US, all positions in the Senate are elected positions. In the UK, there are hereditary peers and the rest are appointed by the party in power. But once appointed, they stay for life. In the UK, there are calls for reform.

Here, all senators are appointed by the party in power. BN has mainly appointed senators friendly to them. The Senate does not act as an independent check. It merely endorses anything that is sent to them. It is a waste of time.

This is an opportunity for Pakatan Harapan to take a revolutionary step. Amend the Constitution. Require all senators to be elected. Or at least require some to be elected.

The rest must represent minorities and those representing NGOs looking after matters critical to the nation and its people.

Anonymous_d395a08d: A Senate reform can consider the following:

1. Seats are elected through proportional representation. This ensures minority voices are represented;

2. However, seat allocation under the proportional representation should have a threshold, e.g. minimum 5 percent votes, like Germany. This will prevent Senate dominated by fringe or single-issue parties which could be too polarising; and

3. Senate elections can be held mid-term. This is to ensure no drastic change in country policy, and also serves as a mid-term popular verdict for governing parties in power.

Vgeorgemy: The Senate is designed, just like the Council of Eminent Persons, to protect constitutional values, powers and institutions. Just because Umno-BN misused the institution, it does not lose its usefulness.

The selection of members must be changed to bring back its vibrancy. 50 percent of the seats must be allocated to state assemblies, 25 percent seats must be given to the political parties or coalition based on the percentage of the votes in the Dewan Rakyat election. The rest (25 percent) will be for the cabinet to nominate.

Anonymous_1371457829: First, 30 percent should be based on state government appointment to ensure all the states’ voices are heard.

Another 70 percent of Senate appointment should be based on the vote percentage received by the respective political parties in the previous election. This will reduce the impact of gerrymandering.

There shouldn't be a party whip governing the senators. By default, they vote according to party instruction.

If they decide to vote against the party directive, they have to table a written explanation to the party. From such reasonings, one can judge if the senator has voted according to his or her conscience.

This merely requires a political settlement from both sides, the willingness of the ruling party and the agreement from opposition party (since this is in favour of opposition in terms of Senate appointment).

The constitution can then be amended to implement the changes. This will ensure capable and qualified candidates filling up the Senate instead of just a rubber stamp.

Shovelnose: A review of the Senate appointments is the next step in political reform.

Retain 70 seats in Dewan Negara. Allow for 40 members only to be put forward by parties according to the national proportion of votes (not seats) won in the general election.

The remaining seats shall be apportioned to minorities and less privileged groups, society representatives and special interest representation.

Each half of seats shall be out of sync with the other so that every two years or so there's replacement and no one should be in the Senate for more than two terms, consecutive or at any time period.

PAS lawyer: Shukri should not have held tell-all presser

Gerard Lourdesamy: MACC chief Mohd Shukri Abdull's statement does not compromise the investigation because it did not touch on former PM Najib Razak's culpability in respect of 1MDB and SRC International funds.

Shukri merely informed the public about the alleged attempts to prevent, scuttle and undermine the investigation by the former government and the police. He was protecting the reputation and integrity of the MACC.

If and when Shukri makes a police report regarding these matters, including the threats and intimidation, there will be a separate investigation by the police and MACC on those allegations where Shukri may be a witness.

Once that is done, then Shukri need not make any further public statements on that investigation.

Shark Fins Belong on Sharks: “Create a perception”? PAS lawyer Wan Zainuddin Wan Musa, the head of the MACC unit investigating 1MDB is telling you his unit was disbanded and his life threatened and you are talking about fear of negative perception?

All this revelation is, in fact, crucial in order to protect the lives of the current team of investigators.

Oxymoronictendencies: Are we to believe that Wan Zainuddin believes there was no political interference and that Shukri’s statement raised this claim for the first time?

Shukri’s comments come as no surprise and solely confirm what many suspected was the reality at the time.

Anonymous_201a3ce9: As long as Shukri didn't reveal facts which could prejudice the case, he has every right to relate his personal ordeal.

This change in government also signals something important, I think. No longer should civil servants be quiet when asked or instructed to do something unethical or illegal.

The days of "going through proper channels" should be behind us as it is precisely that which resulted in a government which had to be changed.

It can be seen in the previous government that "going through proper channels" resulted at best in nothing happening, and at worst, loss of position, employment, liberty or even life. - Mkini