KUALA LUMPUR: The mechanisms of the anti-party hopping law should be fine-tuned so that it is not subjected to the Dewan Rakyat speaker's interpretation.
Bersatu vice-president Datuk Seri Dr Ronald Kiandee this was to ensure that the law will not allow the speaker to hold any sort of power to interpret the Federal Constitution (FC).
He added that otherwise, the law will not be effective and will be seen as an instrument to assist the government in power.
"The (Dewan Rakyat) speaker thinks Article 49 (of the FC) provides him the authority as a 'postmaster' to interpret the FC and Bersatu constitution.
"However, it does not give the speaker the authority to interpret and make a decision," he said when contacted by the New Straits Times today.
Kiandee was asked to comment on Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's statement that Putrajaya is open to discussing amendments to the anti-hopping law contained within the FC to address the gaps in the legislation.
Anwar had said Pakatan Harapan in 2022 had proposed that members of parliament sacked by their parties should also be made to vacate their seats, but that the Perikatan Nasional-Barisan Nasional government at the time had rejected this.
The announcement came on the heels of a point of order raised by Kiandee in Parliament yesterday to seek further clarification from Dewan Rakyat Speaker Tan Sri Johari Abdul over the decision made on the status of the party's six former members.
Referring to Article 49 of the FC, Kiandee said it did not provide Johari the power to make a decision, but only to ensure the vacancy of seats.
Johari, however, stood firm in the decision made on the six seats held by former Bersatu members by stating that he was not a "postman" and that thorough studies had been conducted on the matter before arriving at a conclusion.
Meanwhile, Kiandee said the amendments to the FC were nothing new as it had been raised in the Dewan Rakyat several times by the opposition.
This, he said, was as the original intention and goal of the law is to prevent members of parliament from hopping to another party.
"If he (Anwar) wants to do it (the amendment), go ahead as this has been proposed in Parliament several times.
"I, myself, have already suggested that (the proposal) many times but the proposal had no impact on the government as the law is seen to be giving them the upper hand.
"If the law is not improved, it should be repealed as it does not fulfil the intended purpose of its enactment in the first place.
"So might as well repeal the law if it does not serve the purpose, isn't it?"