Party-hopping is not a black and white issue

For civil society, the phenomenon of party hopping is considered something bad that should be done away with. It's unethical, they say, because the electorate generally votes for candidates based on the party they represent rather than for the individual. So, if that individual switches sides after winning, in a way they are cheating the electorate.

On that basis, it's pretty cut and dried: party hopping is unethical. But it should be mentioned that party-hopping is not illegal. And from a realpolitik standing, it's actually useful for achieving certain strategic objectives.

It was through party-hopping, for example, that Pakatan was able to take control over Perak and Sabah. It was also through party-hopping that Pakatan was able to gain a 2/3rds majority in Johor.

Perak was an important state to win back because BN had once taken it away from Pakatan through the very act of party hopping. Sabah was important because it was considered a BN fixed deposit. Securing the 2/3rds majority in Johor, the birthplace of UMNO, was important to send a message to all and sundry that the era of BN is truly over.

Now that Pakatan has achieved those things, there really is no pressing reason to continue accepting party-hoppers. And in some cases it should be rejected outright. Sarawak is a case in point. There are reports that the various BN-linked parties there are thinking of quitting BN en masse. But even if they do, Pakatan should not accept them into their fold because of their ties to Taib Mahmud, who is accused by environmental groups and activists of massive corruption.

What had raised a lot of eyebrows was the fact that Dr M had met with Taib recently. That sparked concerns that he was about to invite the Sarawak BN parties into the Pakatan fold. Both PKR and DAP leaders in Sarawak have made their objections clear about any switch by BN-parties there. Committee on Institutional Reforms member Ambiga has even gone as far as to say that Pakatan should act on Taib.

"They (Pakatan) must have the political will to move against Taib, otherwise they are no different from the previous government."

Any attempt by Bersatu to welcome the Sarawak BN parties into the Pakatan fold would be a big mistake. It would fail anyway because the three other parties (PKR, DAP and Amanah) would object.

If those Sarawak parties want to leave BN, fine. Let them do so. But they should be independent parties. They should not be allowed to be a part of Pakatan and enjoy the benefits of being with the party in power.

There is also concern that Bersatu might welcome party-hopping from UMNO members in order to boost its numbers. Bersatu currently has 13 federal seats, which pales in comparison to PKR's 48 and DAP's 42.

Again, it would be a big mistake if Dr M were to allow party-hopping to happen indiscriminately. It's one thing if they allow a handful of BN reps to switch over to attain important strategic goals like winning back Perak or gaining a 2/3rds majority in Johor. It's quite another to accept non-strategic party-hoppers just for the sake of boosting its numbers.

I don't think Bersatu would be foolish enough to encourage en masse BN migration into its fold. But should it try to do so, the other Pakatan parties would need to intervene and say no.

Technically they can't tell Bersatu what to do but being that Bersatu is part of the Pakatan coalition, it has to listen to its partners in order for it to continue enjoying their support (which is crucial for Dr M to stay on as PM).

It'd be easy to simply take the moral high ground and say in very academic fashion that party-hopping is always a bad thing that needs to be avoided at all cost, regardless of the circumstances. That's a real naive way of looking at it.

Let's face it, politics is not a gentlemanly game where all parties agree to play by the rules. You cannot afford to always act gentlemanly, especially when you're up against an opponent who plays dirty. In such cases, you need to use whatever legal tools you have at your disposal.