One of the most important elements in a democracy is the elections.

Regular and periodic elections indicate a strong democratic governance, which allows eligible citizens to choose their representatives to the legislative institutions.

Post-election, voters definitely hope that there would be stability in the country's governance.

They have made their choice which must therefore be respected.  

Nonetheless, things can take a different turn after a democratic process such as an election when the elected lawmakers decide to cross over to another party from the one they represented in the election.

Their moves are termed as party switching, party hopping or floor crossing.

Voters would definitely feel some sort of injustice over the fact that their choices have been disrespected and their participation in the election process was in vain.

For a country where democratic governance is upheld through the process of elections, voters choice should matter most.

Voters' choice at the ballot box are determined by many factors, including party identification, social setting and the information through the latest technology.

Party identification is when voters support and choose electoral candidates based on the party that the candidate represents. Voters also often identify themselves with that specific political party by becoming party supporters or members.

So when the candidate from one party wins an election and then decides to switch allegiance by hopping to another party, voters who have initially voted for the candidate based on the party would definitely feel violated.

When the anti-party hopping bill was passed in the Dewan Rakyat and Dewan Negara recently, there was a sigh of relief from many quarters.

The passing of such a bill shows the seriousness and commitment of lawmakers from different sides to ensure the matters related to party hopping are addressed accordingly.

Although the bill is not as comprehensive as many want it to be, to have such a law in Malaysia can become a deterring factor for elected lawmakers to switch sides at their whims and fancies.

Or, take into consideration their personal benefits while ignoring the mandate or trust given by voters.

Malaysia has witnessed episodes of party hopping, changing the government's coalition and prime ministers within a span of four years.

Although each change of leadership was done in a peaceful manner, nevertheless, it still indicates that stability of an elected government is not guaranteed if party hopping is still permissible.

Another important motivation for such a bill to be supported and enacted is to regain the confidence of voters on the election process and democracy per se.

A high percentage of voters show their confidence level to the whole process and how much interest they have to determine the group of people who will govern the country.

In this regard, an anti-party hopping law would also allow for stability of an elected government.

Elected lawmakers will have to quickly gear themselves into serving their constituents and not to be persuaded into any power brokering in the post-election period.

Lawmakers must understand that politics is actually the mechanism to advance the people's welfare.

Party hopping can also cause political apathy among voters. It is damaging to democracy and can result in low voter turnouts in elections, lack of interest in national agendas and also deep scepticism in anything they consider to be political.

To elude political apathy among voters, they need to be assured that their voice and vote at the ballot box truly matters.

Therefore, an anti-party hopping law would be able to do just that while bringing back voters' confidence to the election process plus signifying the respect of their rights and decisions.

The writer is fellow at the Centre for the Study of Sharia, Law and Politics, Institute of Islamic Understanding Malaysia

https://www.nst.com.my/opinion/columnists/2022/08/823593/anti-hopping-law-shows-voters-choice-matters-most