The government should train and direct the people in their acquisition of political knowledge and ability, thereby enabling them to exercise the powers of election, recall, initiative, and referendum.
– Sun Yat-sen, Chinese politician, physician and philosopher
The word referendum has been bandied about in Sarawak over the last few years.
Recently, again there have been calls to enact legislations to allow referendums to be held by various politicians and groups aspiring for the exit of Sarawak from the Federation of Malaya.
Cambridge Oxford dictionary defines referendum as “a vote in which all the people in a country or an area are asked to give their opinion about or decide on an important political or social question”.
Its origins based on Wikipedia are said to be from the Latin ‘refero’, “to carry back” leading to the Latin expression ‘propositum quod referendum est populo’ (a proposal which must be carried back to the people).
Referendums are usually single issue resolutions, example a vote for succession ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ from an existing nation, as had happened in South Sudan, where the outcome was 98.83 per cent voting ‘Yes’ for independence.
On the surface it seems holding a referendum is an easy and straight forward matter. Put up a resolution and people vote ‘Yes’ or ‘No’. I suppose it is straight forward if the “gasak ajak” approach is taken.
However, there are many aspects and details of referendums that have to be looked at before one can be held.
First and foremost is the necessity to legislate for the framework for a referendum. In Sarawak, a referendum ordinance will have to be passed via the Sarawak State Legislative Assembly.
Before this is done a practical and workable referendum system would have to be discussed and agreed upon. To do this, those drafting the details would have to consider the purpose a referendum system.
Do we want a referendum system that would be a move towards a ‘purer form of democracy’ whereby anything and everything can be ‘put up’ and voted upon? If so, this would then entail having provisions that would allow for maximum flexibility of issues that can be voted upon.
On the other hand, a system that restricts the types of issues that can be voted upon can also be devised. This would entail having certain strict criteria or prerequisites that have to be fulfilled prior to a referendum resolution being approved before it is put forward for a popular vote.
Referendum voting also ranges from the simple ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ systems to the multiple-choice system, whereby voters can be given choices ranging from three or more options.
Once this is looked into in detail it is actually quite a challenge. It is not as some perceive an extended form of democracy but could be said to be a purer form of democracy. If this is not managed well, it can turn into a double-edged sword.
Some studies have indicated that referendums can in effect undermine democracy rather than expand it. This is because people might end up voting not only on the virtues of the resolution but base their decisions on unrelated political and emotive issues.
Voters sometimes make their decisions with very little relevant information. They can also in some cases get influenced by ‘sound bites’ or political messaging.
The outcome ends up with the political elites manipulating the outcome rather than the voters making independent decisions. Just look at the outcome of ‘Brexit’ to date, an advanced nation is in what seems like utter chaos.
Referendums can also be non-binding in nature, meaning they act as an advisory notice to the government. Alternatively, they can be categorised as binding, meaning compulsory for the government to implement.
Once a working mechanism and framework are decided upon and the necessary legislative processes are undertaken there are still more matters to be resolved.
Sarawak has an area of 124,450 sq km, almost as big as Malaya. Whenever elections are held, there are issues that need additional attention.
We have many constituencies in the interior and matters such as the budget for polling centres, transport, election workers, election equipment, ballot papers, indelible ink etc. have to be taken into consideration.
Therefore, the mechanism to implement referendums can be very costly. It is basically just like holding an election if the tradition ballot box system is used.
In the 2016 Sarawak election, an estimated budget of RM150 million was allocated for the election process.
So if we were to hold referendums from time to time it would entail a considerable financial outlay. So direct democracy via referendums could become an expensive exercise.
However, with the IR4.0 and digital economy initiatives by our Chief Minister, I am sure referendums could be carried out using an online platform making it viable for long term usage. An online approached, however, could only be viable if our interior is made internet ready.
Overall, until now it seems there is still much ambivalence among the populace towards a system of a referendum.
However, I think the tipping point has been reached now, with the latest statement by our Prime Minister that the 20 per cent royalty promised to Sarawak before GE14 is not going to be fulfilled based on concocted reasons.
I am sure many Sarawakians will start leaning towards passing a referendum ordinance in Sarawak to allow them an ‘exit’ option from the federation.
Personally, I would say that we should proceed with a carefully crafted referendum ordinance with appropriate checks and balances.
It is time for Sarawak to expand its democracy in our own way suitable to its own unique social landscape.
Let’s do it!
The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the New Sarawak Tribune.
