In 2003, Malaysiakini did a controversial interview with Election Commission chief Abdul Rashid Abdul Rahman while led to then prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad expressing his unhappiness over what he told the online news site.

abdul rashid abdul rahmanSince Malaysiakini is unable to obtain a follow-up interview with Abdul Rashid on the eve of another election, we are republishing the three-part interview which we did four years ago.

In this second of a three-part series, he explains how he was unable to curb money politics.

Malaysiakini: In your opinion, is there any level-playing field among political parties during elections?

Abdul Rashid: We need a lot of improvement to make sure that it is really level. But you can never get 100 percent level (playing field) because of the other laws that come into place... the ISA (Internal Security Act), the Sedition Act... There must be a certain level of tolerance - which I find very hard to come by now.

Going back to the need for the EC to monitor election expenses...

The law states that we are not to be concerned by the expenditure, we can only impose a limit on candidates, but we are not to scrutinise them. They make their declarations on their expenditure and we accept (them at face value).

It is up to the rival candidate to scrutinise (the expenditure declaration). As long as you submit in time, we don’t bother. We just gazette it. We do make it public so if there is dispute, the rival candidate can take it to court through an election petition.

But how are they going to challenge if they don’t know the details?

There is itemisation... the bottom line is that you don’t go overboard. But usually they declare exactly the maximum amount. This is stupid.

Do you plan to send some officers to monitor certain constituencies on election spending?

That is not our duty because the law has already defined (what are) the abuses, corrupt practices, illegal practices. We are not allowed to sue people, and neither can people sue us.

But doesn’t the law allow you to punish them if the candidates are found to be breaching the laws.

The law does not allow us to punish, it is the court that punishes them. That is the system in this country. And independent judiciary will do the punishing, but we will have to go to court.

So who is to initiate the action against wrongdoers?

The opponents, they can lodge a report, sue them. Take them to court. Opposition parties come to me, like DAP’s Lim Kit Siang - everyday, he ‘wallops’ the EC. That’s alright, he only wants political mileage but he got no issue... so EC is a very good punching bag for him [laughs].

He raised these kind of issues like money politics. I asked him: ‘What money politics? You expect me to have eyes and ears to be everywhere (and monitor) who take or give money? That’s not my duty. I just put the polling booth and then you vote. Whether you vote for money, I do not know. But if you know, you take them to court.’ He said he does not believe in judiciary, they are unfair. (But) then you (can’t) blame me.

Then he (Lim) said it (court action) takes a long time, which will cost a lot of money. That is also true. But what do you expect EC to do? Take the government on? The law does not allow us to do that.

In spite of all this, in terms of electoral management, we are first class, five star. I went to a talk in Cambridge on elections, they were impressed. They know what we are doing with our electoral management. It is very transparent and people participate all the way starting with nominations, the polls - voting is very transparent, nobody can cheat. Then counting is easy and fast - (by) 9pm (on the same polling day) , the government will be already on stage.

But in term of other things, the law does not allow the EC to have full power.

What about independent monitoring of postal votes?

That is within our power. I have been agitating for some change. I have been proposing changes, some went through. The usual request from (political) parties is that they want to monitor postal votes. They were doubtful what went on in the (army) camps.

So at the first stage, we managed to get our officers in there but of course the political parties do not trust the EC. They (opposition parties) say, ‘we don’t trust you’. And they want to go in to see for themselves. So I brought it to the government, I went to see (defence minister) Najib Razak who said that he will bring up to the higher authority but until today there is no answer yet.

What about fair coverage to all parties in the media?

If you talk about poll campaigns over TV, public TV under the Broadcasting Act, the minister has full power. I tell them, ‘don’t do this’. They tell me to shut up, what can I say. This is true! But if it is within our law, then we can regulate, but if it is not within our law, I cannot do anything.

So you can only advise the media?

Yes, that is all I can do. Now what I am doing is writing the election code of ethics which we have not done before. We do have our ‘do’s and don’ts’, which nobody follows... what we say do, they don’t! [Laughs]

Often after the parliament has been dissolved, the ruling coalition as the caretaker government has been known to abuse government machineries during the election campaign.

This is what Kit Siang has been berating about. I challenge Kit Siang to take the issue to court. We are the not the right party to be taking up the issue. He should institute a petition seeking a court interpretation of caretaker government. Get the court to clearly state its function.

(If that can be done), I’ll be the happiest person. This is a very grey area. The (caretaker) government is not elected by people, yet they function as government... to me, that should not be (the way).

But when the late Tunku Abdul Rahman was the prime minister, he stepped down as the PM soon after the parliament was dissolved.

When I read the constitution, I see nothing to suggest that PM has to step down (after the government is dissolved). I think therefore the court is the best avenue to determine the issue and interpret this. Let it decide what is wrong and put in its opinion on the dos and don’ts of a caretaker government.

And tell Kit Siang to shut up! If he doesn’t do that (take court action), then stop barking at me [laughs]. I can’t do anything. I have mentioned this to the government and they asked me whether this was the EC function? I cannot do anything, my hands are tied. All I can point out is that this is a grey area.

In the coming election, can we get expect some changes in this grey area?

The opposition parties can get together and bring it to court. They can ask for a very quick decision (for the court to expedite the case). And stop barking at me. What is the use of barking at the wrong tree?

Going back to the election expenses rule, can the rival candidate examine what had been declared?

Yes. The expenses declaration is open for the scrutiny of the rival candidate. They can ask for copies and we give them for free. This is because we encourage people to take matters to court to resolve issues. This encourage transparency.

But how can they prove it? Candidates don’t go around giving money in public. If you have people, standing at the voting area, at the gate, giving out money to voters, seeking their support, then we can act. But that never happens. So what? I have to have ghosts all over the place to monitor (the situation)?

But in the event if one of the EC enforcement officers - something which will be introduced in the coming election - witness any wrongdoing, can he act?

Of course. This (EC enforcement team) is one of the new things that I have introduced since I became the EC chairperson, and which managed to get through.

This is a joint-enforcement team. All political parties participate and take responsibilities jointly at constituencies levels. We want to stop any wrongdoings on the spot and if the (wrongdoers) are adamant, we can get the police to step in. This is a very powerful team! And by so doing, we hope that all these hanky-panky things will stop.

How many people will be involved in each team?

The team consists of the candidate’s agent - maybe two or three - the police with the rank of inspector or above with arresting power, the EC officials, and local authority, because the municipal laws are involved as well, like billboards. The ones (posters) which are too personal in nature will have to be taken down by the municipal enforcement officers.

This is one way to have a clean election campaign. We have to start somewhere. But of course, people like Kit Siang will say that this is not enough. But we are trying our best. The last time I tried to make changes but failed because I was only the secretary. Now I (as the EC chief) encourage my boys to put up the draft and submit them. Never mind we may irritate them (the government). We try to do something so that in the end we can seen to be independent, fair.


ABDUL RASHID ABDUL RAHMAN was interviewed by the Malaysiakini team at his Putrajaya office on Sept 4, 2003.


Part 1 - Q&A: EC not meant to be 'fully' independent

Tomorrow: They’re ‘planted’, not phantom voters