Freedom and Fraud

Article 10 Clause 1(c) of the Federal Constitution guarantees the freedom of speech, assembly and association subjected to arbitrary restriction from Parliament as outlined by Article 10 Clause(s) 2, 3 and 4.

Section 418 of the Penal Code & Criminal Procedure Code states, “Whoever cheats with the knowledge that he is likely thereby to cause wrongful loss to a person whose interest in the transaction to which the cheating relates, he was bound either by law, or by a legal contract, to protect, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years or with fine or with both.”

When a politician is elected by its constituency on a particular ticket, he becomes the people’s representative of that certain political party in which he is a member of. This is owing to the fact that when he campaigned during the election period, he promoted and endorsed his party’s doctrine and ideology to the voters so that they will vote either for the party or for himself. In a way, he has agreed to enter into a legal verbal covenant with his voters to get their vote of confidence, and this is achieved using his party platform as the means to contest the election.

Now, ten months into his tenure, this assemblyman (or woman) decides that he (or she) does not believe in what the party politicizes and decides to leave the party to join the opposing political party. Regardless of his incentives, motives or morals, this person possesses the freedom as enshrined in Article 10 Clause 1(c) of the Federal Constitution to enlist himself in any other political party, as he deems fit and proper. The matter of fact is that the seat in which he still retains as an assemblyman will be “lost” to whichever party he lands on. The question now is whether a crime is committed. Constitutionally, there is nothing to stop him from doing a jumper. Legally, he can be challenged in court with fraud because he is in direct infringement of the verbal contract he has with his constituency, an agreement he has now broken. The mandate accorded to him is as a representative of the political party he contested on, not otherwise. The promises and pledges he made to his constituency are based on that certain party’s ideology, not otherwise. The people voted for his initial party, not otherwise. Now that this person has rescinded on his former party dogma, a creed in which he blatantly used as his campaign platform and an affiliation in which he employed to convince the voters to elect him, he is thus committing fraud if he continues to act as an assemblyman (for the opposing political party).

Secondly, by refusing to step down voluntarily, he is cheating his constituency of their legitimate right to elect another person in his place.

There are those that say that this fraudster is conferred the freedom of association and it is within his constitutional right to choose as he pleases. True, and I agree entirely that he can bloody well do so, albeit after his resignation. He can join the defunct NAZI party or the fat-bottomed gay cyclist club of Timbuk3 for all I care, but that is after he steps down from his elected position as assemblyman. His right of choice does not include the voters’ rights. Additionally, for those who attest to the fact that it sets precedence for the violation of human rights, think again before you start screaming your head off. What about the collective human rights of the misled voters as against this one fraudster? Who was the one seeking public life and getting onto the stage with the party flag at the rear, professing enduring loyalty to the party and unreserved public service to his constituency?

If the judiciary deems this person culpable of fraud, then there is no longer a necessity for those anti-hopping laws as it will be superfluous. Fraud is a criminal act and is punishable “with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years or with fine or with both”. The guilty party will be disqualified immediately owing to the fact that (1) he or she will not be present at his or her constituent for any time between the next three to seven years; and (2) he or she has perpetrated a criminal act. In such cases, the seat automatically becomes vacant by default and a by-election be held to seek a fresh mandate from the constituency.

The fraudster may argue that at the precise moment when he sought to be elected on that particular party ticket, he was in fact a loyal member and this does not constitute as fraud because he was not deceiving the voters when he spoke the things he did then. Not a valid argument and worse still, this fraudster has become an immoral cheat as well. Of course one does not contemplate leaving the party during the elections. There must be a reason, after being elected, for that assemblyman to abscond to the enemy camp. Come to think of it, that female dog supposedly had twenty five million valid reasons for doing so. Don’t ask me. Ask her what they are and this female dog will probably woof to you in the peaceful air-conditioned environment inside her chauffeured state-owned Toyota Camry, that is if you can find her kennel in the first place.

So, what is it going to be? Freedom and fraud?

– Hakim Joe