• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology Vol. 29, No. 06, (2020), pp. 1811-1814 Understanding Young Political and Comprehensive Tax Program in ASEAN Heri Kusmanto1, Agung Suharyanto2, Yudi Prayoga3, I Gusti Ayu Purnamawati4, Nur Arif Nugraha5 1Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan, Indonesia. Email: [email protected] 2Universitas Medan Area, Medan, Indonesia. Email: [email protected] 3Universitas Labuhanbatu, Indonesia. Email: [email protected] 4Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha, Indonesia. Email: [email protected] 5Politeknik Keuangan Negara STAN, Indonesia. Email: [email protected] Abstract Many young people are unlikely to have committed to political views or ingrained themselves to ideologies, and their decision making may just be governed by issues affecting them and their peers. What are their aspirations, fears and concerns, their values and world views? Many young people, for instance, feel disenfranchised and marginalized over what they see to be an uncertain future. Jobs, opportunities, social issues, and the environment, for example, weigh heavily on their young shoulders. As a result, many millennials suggest family and property are luxuries they may not be able to afford. Keywords: tax program, young political, government, Malaysia, Philipine, ASEAN 1. Introduction We cannot comprehend why some Malaysian people who claim to be defenders of democracy can behave in such an uncivil manner like protesting at Merdeka Square against the idea of a “backdoor” government. Such action shows lack of respect to the king Sultan Abdullah of Pahang and the important constitutional role that he plays in choosing the prime minister who would command a majority in parliament. It is also showing their lack of understanding on our system of parliamentary democracy. Firstly, there is no such thing as a “backdoor government”. It is either a legitimate government or an illegitimate government, and if necessary, such as on the Perak state constitutional crisis of 2009, it is for the courts to rule on it. Secondly, we do not tell the king how to perform his constitutional role or who to appoint as the next prime minister. If he is not able to find a member of parliament (MP) who can command a majority in parliament, he can wait a little longer for an MP concerned to have a simple majority. Legitimate “horse trading deals” are being done all the time. Or he can call for a snap election. Sure, we can express our opinion but do not protest yet. It would be better to leave it to the wisdom of the king to make such a decision. If we think he has made the wrong decision, then we may protest but within the framework of the law, otherwise we may be committing an offence, especially relating to sedition. Thirdly, it may not be immoral or wrong to appoint a new government halfway through its term when the ruling Pakatan Harapan (PH) coalition collapsed. The king can dissolve parliament and call for snap polls. 2. The idea of a snap election There are also those who support the idea of a snap election because they believe they have no chance of forming a new government and/or that they would now perform much better in the polls. There are two ways of looking at this issue of whether MPs are allowed to change their mind halfway through its term, defect from the ruling coalition and decide by a simple majority to form a new government regardless of whether PH is involved or not. First, in our parliamentary system, it is the voters who first elect their respective MPs and then it up to the MPs to decide who to support as the prime minister and if chosen by the king, he or she shall then form the government of the day. There are no requirements for such an MP to have a political party or for his/her party to be in a coalition. The MP can be a lone ranger and a gardener for all we know, as long as the king believes that ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST 1811 Copyright ⓒ 2019 SERSC International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology Vol. 29, No. 06, (2020), pp. 1811-1814 he can command a simple majority in parliament. The spirit of this rule is clearly stated in the Constitution. Many people do not seem to understand that the key element of our democratic system is the supremacy of parliament, that a majority of MPs can at any time, form a new government, as long as the country’s constitution and head of state (in our case, the king) allow for it. If the voters are not happy with the stance taken by their respective MPs, then go voice out to them or remove them at the next election. This concept is also practiced by the more democratically mature countries in Europe and Australia. Second, we may argue that we voted for an MP on the understanding that he or she is a member of a party and the party is part of a coalition has a simple majority in Parliament. And that this MP is not allowed to defect from his/her party or coalition and he/she is even not allowed to change his/her mind halfway through the term (of normally five years) for whatever reasons, on who should be the incumbent or next prime minister. The first part is clearly stated in the Constitution. The second aspect is only an understanding or assumption and there are no way of proving how many voters supported this argument. If we still insist on the second, then we must campaign to change the law like what the Penang state did, to outlaw party hopping or defection at the federal level. However, such a law is immature and undemocratic. The dynamics during the five-year period must be recognized. Calling for a snap election should only be the last resort as it is time consuming with huge resources involved. It may also be more divisive at a time when we should be more focused on in addressing our economy and how to move it forward. The king is demonstrating clearly to the people that he would act within the spirit of the Constitution on his appointment of a new prime minister or in calling a snap election. Since the biggest challenge facing our country now is the economy, the new prime minister would hopefully appoint a new finance minister who has the competence, experience, wisdom and integrity to undertake such a massive job. 3. The amendments to the Constitution to lower the voting age If 18-years-old Malaysians were to vote in 2023, current third formers, those who will be taking their state exams, will be part of a potent political force whose impact few can imagine. Together with those who were not eligible to vote in the previous election, we would see an estimated 7.8 million new voters, adding to the 14 million or so registered now. This is perhaps the most significant change since the first election in 1955. The amendments to the Constitution to lower the voting age and introduce automatic voter registration were passed by both houses of parliament last July, with bipartisan support, too. The Election Commission is now dotting the ”i” s and crossing the ”t” s before they come into effect. Elections are often impacted by the entry of a new cohort of voters. First-time voters are often energized by the novelty of going to the ballot box. With they being a third of eligible voters in 2023, one can only speculate how the demographic will affect the outcomes. Our political system favors the older generation, as they are the ones who have invested time in politics. Yet, the electorates are getting younger. The country’s median age is a shade under 29, and significantly more than 60 per cent of the population is under 40. However, our politicians and politics are old. The 55 and older, of which I am one, constitute 15 per cent of voters, but we have a disproportionate influence over politics, policies and the political process. Granted, one can get wiser with age, but as one gets older, one is also compromised, cautious and keen to retain the status quo. Older folks hardly move the needle when it comes to innovation or addressing new issues. Climate change, for instance, is much understood and feared by the millennials, who will likely have to live through the catastrophe. It is a rarity for an older person to be as concerned about a future that he has no part in. ISSN: 2005-4238 IJAST 1812 Copyright ⓒ 2019 SERSC International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology Vol. 29, No. 06, (2020), pp. 1811-1814 Most of our political thinking and philosophies were formed decades ago. While they evolved over time, they continue to be bogged down by old political chestnuts of race and religion, which hold less sway among the young. 4. The lower voting age widens representation There are many who say an 18-year-old is still unwise to the ways of the world. Well, we have seen too many sins committed by order, presumably wiser folks, too. As it is, the law recognizes them as adults, and if they do the crime, they will do the time. It is patently unfair that they be disallowed to have a say in the formation of a government that can ask them to put their lives on the line if they were to enroll in the military. No one should be denied the right to suffrage just because we think their tender age may lead them to vote differently.

Load more

  4

Copy Link