Constitutional law expert Shad Saleem Faruqi had suggested that Malaysia consider electoral systems such as GRC for local elections in Kuala Lumpur, in which teams of candidates are elected together to reflect a community’s diversity.
According to The Straits Times, Shad Saleem said such an approach may help ensure diverse representation in urban areas.
Responding to the proposal, Sunway University political scientist and Projek Sama co-founder Wong Chin Huat said ethnic exclusion can and should be addressed by an electoral system. However, he opposed adopting the GRC system, arguing that it could worsen the ethnic exclusion problem.
Wong told FMT the GRC system is a variant of the First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) electoral system with two features – a multi-member constituency, and a minority quota.
He said the GRC system is not ideal as opposition or small political parties can be wiped out under FPTP, which is based on the winner-takes-all system.
Wong said Perikatan Nasional and Barisan Nasional, which gained 20% and 16% of the votes, respectively, in Kuala Lumpur during the 2022 general election, would not gain any seats at all under the GRC system.
“This is not only unfair, it would accentuate the communal anxieties of PN and BN voters,” he said, adding that ethnic quota is not exclusive to the GRC system as it can be easily implemented under closed-list proportional representation (CLPR).
CLPR is a system of proportional representation based on pre-registered political parties, with each party allocated a number of seats roughly proportional to its share of the votes. It is practised in countries such as Germany, Spain and Portugal.
“I would propose a 50-50 combination of FPTP and CLPR seats,” Wong said. “Suppose we have 48 federal territory city councillors in total, 24 would be elected through FPTP in 24 single-member constituencies, while the other 24 would be elected through CLPR in a single 24-member constituency.”
Past law allowed a form of plurality block voting
Danesh Prakash Chacko, chairperson of Tindak, said the superseded Local Government Elections Act 1960 allowed a form of plurality block voting, similar to the party block vote employed in the GRC system.
Chacko said some states have multi-member wards for local councils, where a party fields as many candidates as needed to fill vacancies, and voters can select multiple candidates.
He said GRC amplifies the “worst aspects of FPTP”, in which a party that does not win the majority vote can sweep a multi-member ward.
“GRC is not the answer to ensuring candidates’ diversity as it did not increase minority representation in Singapore’s parliament,” he said.
He said if the concern is diversifying the local elections candidate base, then the mixed-member proportional (MMP) system should be considered.
MMP combines winner-take-all FPTP elections with a compensatory tier of party lists, producing proportional representation overall.
Chacko said proportional representation could facilitate greater diversity among candidates and allow citizens’ views to be reflected in the elected council.
“South Africa, which uses a proportional system for national and provincial elections, opted for MMP for local council elections.
“It is important that people know their local councillors, which can be achieved via FPTP. At the same time, a proportional element ensures that people’s will is reflected,” he said.
Introduced in 1988, Singapore’s GRC model requires teams of three to six candidates, with at least one from a minority ethnic group such as Malay or Indian.
It is designed to prevent ethnic enclaves and guarantee parliamentary diversity in Singapore’s multiracial society, and aligns with ethnic housing quotas.
However, critics argue that the GRC model entrenches incumbents and raises barriers for smaller parties needing full teams.