Between Bunting and Gavels: Political and Legal Accountability in Malaysia

There are generally two forms of constitutional accountability in the world today – political and legal accountability. Through these two methods a government in power can be held to account for its actions.

Political accountability basically means that the Executive is held in check through political means and institutions. If the policies of Pak Lah and company make us, the rakyat, mad, we can cast our vote against the Scales to show our displeasure. In a country with a strong democracy, this would mean that the government who screwed up would have to be content with being the opposition for the next five years. Of course, in Malaysia, that has not happened in our 50 years of existence.

Legal accountability, on the other hand, involves the courts intervening in the event that the Executive does something unlawful (read: constitutionally wrong). Of course, the word ‘intervene’ is misleading, as generally it takes a well-funded organisation or a well-endowed citizen to take the government to court – by itself, the judiciary does not poke its nose into the government’s dirty linen.

The United Kingdom is a country in which traditionally it is the role of politicians to take the government to task for its errors. Like all vibrant democracies, it has seen many changes in power throughout the last century. Hence, it is clear that robust and lively politics is necessary for this form of accountability to do its job.

In contrast, legal accountability is very much alive in the United States. The Supreme Court is indeed supreme in this nation under God. Laws passed which go against the Constitution are struck down with much force and vigour. Here we can see that a strong and independent judiciary is vital to the functioning of this method of checking the Executive.

In our country, however, we find both forms of accountability sadly lacking.

The Barisan National (or its predecessor, the Alliance) has been in power for the last half century, without even the slightest interruption. The reasons behind this are many and interwoven, but one thing is clear: something is rotten in the state of our politics. Not only has the ruling party never lost a single election, it is never even lost its two-third majority in the Dewan Rakyat. Even in our angriest states (such as in 1999), we have never managed to be bold enough to show our displeasure clearly.

I once believed that judicial review would be a better alternative in this country. After all, if our politics takes place in an undeniably uneven playing field, we can at least rely on impartial and fair judges to “let the guilty hang”. How wrong I was. With the unveiling of the Lingam tape, it is now ever more so clear that our judiciary is a toothless lion restrained by an invisible leash held by its master, the government. What began with the emasculation of our court system in 1988 has continued to the point that we can no longer trust the learned men in black (robes).

To be a true democracy and not a failed state, we need to strengthen our opposition, and restore life to our emaciated judiciary. Otherwise, all will be lost.