Matches to reflect upon

THE final of the men’s singles tournament at Wimbledon provided the most convincing evidence so far of a changing of the guard in the tennis world. Carlos Alcaraz, 20, defeated Novak Djokovic, his senior by 16 years, in a gripping five-set match.

The Spaniard denied the Serb his 24th Grand Slam victory, which would have increased his lead over Rafael Nadal (22) and Roger Federer (20). (Cue arguments of who is “greatest of all time”, for it’s not just about that statistic, but the relative strength of contemporaneous competitors, and players’ behaviour and conduct – the idea of “greatness” being variously defined.)

In explaining tennis scoring to a non-tennis fan, I was reminded that it is possible for a player to win fewer points and yet win the match, or for a score to imply a devastating result when the games were actually competitive; “the games went to deuce” is usually how a disgruntled loser cushions a 0-6 loss.

Due to Malaysia’s federal status and use of the first past the post voting system, our electoral politics can exhibit some similar qualities. It is actually theoretically possible for one party to win every single seat in all the state legislative assemblies, but still lose in the Dewan Rakyat.

One reason might be that voters deliberately pick different parties at state and federal level (as was especially common in Penang), but even without that, a major factor is the delineation of constituencies and distribution of voters: a party might win a federal seat, but other parties might win the state seats within it.

The upcoming rare incidence of six states going for polls separately from the Dewan Rakyat has obviously generated an unprecedented amount of analysis and forecasting.

A foray into social media suggests that this election is simultaneously about bread-and-butter issues (mainly cost of living and opportunities), national identity and stability (in which the 3Rs of race, religion and royalty feature), and a contest between personalities (usually party leaders and big guns, more than fresh candidates who have just been announced). The geographical weightage between these aspects will decide the result.

Business people and diplomats, however, emphasise the importance of stability. This is to ensure continued recovery of investors’ confidence, and ongoing execution of needed reforms. Still, while “stability” is often regarded as a code word for “continuing with the same government” (and usually exploited by the incumbents as such), it doesn’t always apply. In some cases where a government is weak and dysfunctional with no clear policy agendas, a change in government might actually represent a return to stability.

Thus, even though parliamentary seats are not being contested, the state election results will be keenly watched for its effect on federal politics. Some are convinced that shockwaves may even cause the unity government to collapse.

In most democracies, of greater importance in the long term is stability and continuity in an institutional sense. This means that if there is a change of government, other institutions of a country are able to carry on functioning, providing assurance even if policies are changed.

This includes not only the judiciary and the civil service, but also the various statutory commissions, police, armed forces and the monarchy. It is when such institutions are overly compromised by politics that we no longer function as a constitutional democracy.

In recent speeches I have remained upbeat about the growing resilience of our institutions – especially Parliament itself – but certain friends have warned me otherwise. They tell me that a growing number of young Malaysians are totally hostile to the constitutional cause. Their utopian vision of a future Malaysia does not feature the Constitution, Parliament or the monarchy at all, and the efforts of Tunku Abdul Rahman and his colleagues for Merdeka and Malaysia are not revered, but despised.

Such polarising views will lead us to a constitutional crisis – or worse – and that is why I continue to be alarmed by the slow progress of civic education in our schools.

Of course, that should include sport, in which the Bapa Malaysia often likened the rules of a sport to the rule of law.

So it is good that Malaysian women are battling other countries in the ongoing Billie Jean King Cup. Of course it would have been an added inspiration if Wimbledon was won for the first time by a Muslim, Arab and African woman. Sadly Ons Jabeur, who I was cheering on in Centre Court last year as well – again did not succeed. She described it as the “most painful loss of my career” and vowed to try again.

Hopefully that will be the healthy attitude of the unsuccessful candidates of the upcoming state elections!

Tunku Zain Al-‘Abidin is founding president of the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (Ideas). The views expressed here are the writer’s own.