Southeast Asia - Articles

In an unprecedented political upheaval, the coalition front of Barisan Nasional (BN), which had been governing Malaysia since 1969, saw the biggest ever reduction in its political representation in the parliamentary and provincial elections, held on 8 March 2008. The BN lost control over five provinces and could secure only a simple majority by winning 139 out of 222 parliamentary seats. All three important ethnic components of the BN – United Malay National Organisation (UMNO), Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA) and Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC) – saw many of their top leaders being defeated. Large numbers of Malays and a majority of ethnic Chinese and Indians voted for opposition groups comprising the ethnic Chinese-dominated Democratic Action Party (DAP), the Islamic party of Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS) and the Anwar Ibrahim-led Parti Keadilaan Rakyat (PKR). The PKR+DAP+PAS alliance gained 81 parliamentary seats, increasing their share from 20 seats in the 2004 elections.

What do these facts and figures portend for the nature and direction of Malaysian bodypolitik? Do the election results signify any important shifts in the Islamic discourse in the country? Do they reflect any change in the nature of majority-minority politics within the country either in terms of assertion and consolidation of minority identities or in terms of rejection of the existing leaderships of the minority communities? Does the election reflect overall rejection of the policies and politics of the BN/United Malays Nasional Organisation by the Malaysians? These questions need to be addressed in earnest.

First, the 2008 election signifies a growing shift in the political discourse, away from the issues of political Islam towards civic electoral politics, reflecting on issues of governance, corruption, and cronyism. The BN coalition, had captured roughly 90 per cent of parliamentary seats in 2004 on the plank of development, no corruption, no crime, whereas, the PAS, which stressed on greater application of Islamic laws was completely routed. It is amply evident from the results of the three elections of 1999, 2004 and 2008 that the party, which raised the issues of corruption, cronyism and crime, succeeded in securing large number of seats and whichever party raised issues of Islam saw rejection by the common voters. The failure of the BN in ensuring clean governance and its pursuit of Islamic politics during the last four years led to its loss of a large number of seats, whereas the PAS’ emphasis on developmental issues paid off handsomely for the party.

Second, the election results reflect consolidation of minority voices against the UMNO-led coalition, in general and against the majoritarian politics of the UMNO, in particular. Both ethnic Chinese and Indians not only did not vote for their representative parties – MCA and MIC – but also voted for the PKR, which is being seen as the only viable alternative against the ethno-centric, majority-centric and UMNO-centric BN framework. The number of seats won by the MCA came down from 31 in 2004 to 15 in 2008 and the number of seats won by the MIC fell from 9 in 2004 to 3 in 2008. In fact, ethnic Chinese and Indians preferred to vote for the DAP and PKR. Similarly, the share of UMNO in the parliamentary seats came down from 109 in 2004 to 79 in 2008. By contrast, the DAP and PKR were able to win 28 and 31 seats respectively, which highlights huge gains compared to their dismal performance in 2004 (DAP – 12, PKR – 1), when the BN had actually emerged as the champion of good governance and development.

Third, Malaysian Indians have summarily rejected its elite-centric and inefficient platform – MIC. The President of the MIC, Samy Velu lost the seat to his ethnic Indian opponent, R Jayakumar, who was contesting for the PKR. Even in terms of overall results, the MIC performed miserably as Indians rallied around non-Indian representative parties, such as DAP and PKR.

The rejection of the MIC poses an important question before ethnic Indians. In what direction will the politics of minority Indians move, given their dismal representation within the BN, and the lack of any political front and leadership after the defeat of Velu? How much bargaining power will the community have in the national politics in the absence of any political front, dedicated to their cause? Are ethnic Indians prepared and willing to participate in the Malaysian political process as individual citizens?

The answer for the time being is, yes. Development, governance and equality are the most important political issues for Indians than their Indianness. At the same time, there is an attempt by ethnic Indian leaders, such as, D Jayakumar (PKR), P Ramasamy (DAP), and M Manoharan (DAP) to develop a consolidated minority platform either through the DAP or the PKR, which could represent their concerns. In an attempt to represent minority voices, both the DAP and PKR have decided to have two deputy Chief Ministers (one each from ethnic Chinese and Indian community) in the provincial governments, such as in Penang. On the other hand, it remains to be seen, how much representation the MIC, already rejected by the Indian community, will have in the coalition BN government.