Letter To the Editor
One may ask: With the Sarawak Government enjoying such overwhelming political strength, and an opposition that often appears more interested in political stunts than constructive engagement, who should provide the necessary check and balance against such a powerful government?
My answer is simple: Our democratic institutions.
In a functioning federation, the Federal Government’s institutional framework, particularly its independent enforcement and oversight bodies, must play a crucial role in ensuring accountability at every level of government.
Take, for example, the recent controversy involving allegations of irregularities in government procurement.
If DAP (Democratic Action Party) believes there are serious grounds to suspect corruption or abuse of power, then the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC) is precisely one of the institutions established to investigate such allegations.
The question should not merely be whether the opposition has sufficient political strength to challenge the government in the Sarawak Legislative Assembly.
The more important question is whether our enforcement institutions possess the independence, integrity and courage to discharge their statutory responsibilities, regardless of who holds political power.
That is what institutional checks and balances are supposed to achieve.
A democratic country should never have to depend on one or two politicians, however vocal or courageous they may be, to safeguard the integrity of its government.
It must depend on a system in which institutions are empowered to act independently, impartially and without fear or favour.
And this brings me to another important point.
The present Federal Government came into office with promises to strengthen institutional independence, improve accountability and reform the relationship between political power, enforcement and prosecution.
We should be demanding that those promises of institutional reform be fulfilled,
rather than accepting institutional weakness as a permanent feature of our
democracy.
Of course, the opposition has an important constitutional and democratic role. It mustscrutinise government policies, question public expenditure, challenge questionable decisions and bring matters of public concern into the open.
However, the manner in which we express political disagreement is equally important.
In our Chinese cultural tradition, we have long valued the principle of — harmony without uniformity.
We may hold opposing views, disagree strongly and challenge one another, but we should never lose our sense of courtesy, humility and mutual respect.
After all, the strength of an argument lies in its substance, not in the arrogance or aggression with which it is delivered.
Political disagreement should elevate public discourse, not reduce it to a contest of who can shout the loudest or attack the hardest.
But political scrutiny is not a substitute for independent investigation, lawful enforcement and institutional accountability.
Neither should we confuse the importance of an opposition with the notion that only opposition politicians are capable of providing checks and balances.
Such a narrative risks misleading the public into believing that democracy requires individual political superheroes to protect society from powerful governments.
It does not.
A mature democracy is not built upon the assumption that there must always be a “bad guy” waiting for a “good guy” to come along and put him in his place.
This is democracy, not a Jackie Chan movie where a hero must emerge to defeat the villain.
A mature democracy is built upon a constitutional and institutional framework designed to ensure that whoever holds power remains subject to the law.
That is the difference between a democracy that depends on personalities and one
that depends on institutions.
And ultimately, that is the standard we should aspire to.
We must not allow the public to confuse political theatrics with genuine democratic accountability, or mistake the loudest political performance for the most effective form of checks and balances.
A strong government is not necessarily a threat to democracy. A strong government without effective institutional accountability is.
We do not need perceived superheroes to save our democracy. We need institutions strong enough to ensure that democracy never needs saving by superheroes. —DayakDaily
——————————————————————————————————————
Wong King Wei is a lawyer by profession. He is also former Padungan assemblyman and former DAP Sarawak vice chairman. He has since resigned from the party in July 2020.
This is the personal opinion of the author and does not necessarily represent the views of DayakDaily. Letters to the Editor may be lightly edited for clarity.
