OCTOBER 3 — It’s criminal — or at least reprehensible — to contemplate passing Borneo at least a third of the parliamentary seats when a redistribution concurrently with a seat increase occurs.

Today, Sarawak, Sabah and Labuan hold 57 of the 222 seats, or 26 per cent of Dewan Rakyat. Politicians from the East say their preferred ratio of over 1/3 or 33 per cent was a Malaysian formation guarantee, and necessary to prevent constitutional amendments disadvantageous to Borneo.

However, electoral overcompensation is also problematic.

This is an assiduously pro-Borneo column, so much so, some feel I own a home in Kuching or Kota Kinabalu.

Arguments to improve Borneo’s fortunes and powers have justifiably been made, no less here in this column. That there is a debt of honour is not debatable. Malaysia has built the capital region and its people using Borneo’s resources.

However, all the wrongs done to Borneo need not require wrongs to be reciprocated to Semenanjung residents.

Two wrongs don’t make a right.

Peninsular Malaysia has 27.8 million people compared to Borneo’s 6.3 million people, which is a ratio of 6 to 1. To alter the MP ratio to 2 to 1, effectively dilutes Semenanjung voters’ potency three times over.

It dramatically reduces the West’s democratic worth. The present ratio of 3 to 1 is unfair as it is. To worsen it is unconscionable.

Protecting Borneo

The present conundrum is two sides of the Constitution, its basic contentions and the carefree treatment of it in reality.

The Constitution prohibits discrimination and champions democratic rights at the heart of it. There is enough in it for all Malaysians, the late Haris Ibrahim told me over drinks.

Yet, the document has been amended over 500 times, most times for political expediency rather than for noble reasons. Borneo residents have much to fear, but so do Semenanjung residents.

Constitutional alterations can adversely impact any given Malaysian segment. It is misguided to suggest only one segment, Borneo residents, is at risk.

Nations utilising the federal system factor protections for state interest. The United States of America would not have persisted for almost 250 years if its 50 states had no means to champion their rights.

The House of Representatives is 435 strong, streamlined based on population. So, most populated California and Texas send 52 and 38 representatives respectively to Washington, while Alaska and Wyoming get to send one each.

The imbalance is countered by parity in the Senate where all states send only two senators regardless of population. California, Texas, Alaska, Wyoming and forty-six other states send two each.

Laws have to pass both houses, and states can impose their will in the Senate in order to circumvent the tyranny of the majority.

This type of bicameral system — with legislative powers for elected members in both houses — balances state rights.

Malaysia can investigate this option, or otherwise stipulate a safety measure, like both Sabah and Sarawak state assemblies have to assent to MA63 related constitutional amendments.

The protection of Borneo states can happen without undermining the interests of the other Malaysian states.

Underrepresented and overworked

The two parliamentary seats of Lubok Antu in Sarawak and Bangi in Selangor, provide great contrast and display democratic inequalities. At the last general elections, there were under 30,000 eligible voters in the Sarawak constituency as opposed to over 303,000 in the Selangor constituency. Simply put, Bangi gets a tenth of Lubok Antu’s representation.

It’s ludicrous. The argument that the rural seat is 3,294km² and the city seat only 184km², as a basis to defend Lubok Antu’s rights is flawed. In every sensible democracy, representation is constructed on voter numbers, not area size. People vote, not flora and fauna.

Consider this fact. If Sarawak’s MP count was founded purely on population, it’ll have 16 MPs, and Selangor with 48 MPs.

In a saner and fairer Malaysia, my state gets up to 48 MPs. Unfortunately, Malaysia has yet to manage a grip on saner and fairer.

Bangi MP Syahredzan Johan is not only encumbered by the malapportionment but also by electoral misalignments.

According to the government’s official open data portal (data.gov.my) Lubok Antu’s eligible voters are actually more than residents, there are only 27,000 people living there. Meanwhile Bangi’s actual resident count is 692,000, more than two times its eligible voter total.

Why?

Because a sizeable number of Lubok Antu voters live elsewhere, primarily Kuching, Sibu or perhaps Kuala Lumpur. Conversely, one half of people who live in Bangi vote in other constituencies.

So, Lubok Antu MP Roy Angau Anak Gingkoi potentially hears complaints from 27,000 residents and Syahredzan is confronted by nearly 700,000 residents. But central to our discussion, almost 700,000 residents are effectively represented through one MP.

These Bangi residents who vote in Kuala Nerus, Lenggong or Segamat for instance, complain to the Bangi MP about roads, drains and developments in Bangi, and spuriously not about the roads, drains and developments in Kuala Nerus, Lenggong or Segamat. Since they live in Bangi and not in Kuala Nerus, Lenggong or Segamat.

No favourites, time for objectivity

If all of these are self-evident, why are so many of the 165 MPs from Semenanjung refusing to defend West Malaysia’s interest? Well, any Malaya coalition in the present climate requires Borneo’s bloc vote to form a government. It’s not good politics to lose Borneo friends.

Yet, it is not pleasant to be held at gunpoint by Borneo.

East Malaysia politicians assert themselves even harder these days. It augurs unwell for our democracy, and most certainly state harmony. Every day cannot be about how to make Borneo happy, the people in the other states also desire happiness.

* This is the personal opinion of the columnist.