Anti-hop law
Malaysia’s 2022 anti-hop law added constitutional rules on when a federal MP’s seat becomes vacant after changing party membership.
what happened
Malaysia’s anti-hop law is the common name for a 2022 constitutional amendment, Act A1663. Parliament passed it with 209 votes in the Dewan Rakyat on 28 July, the Dewan Negara approved it on 9 August, and it took effect on 5 October 2022.
Its central rule is in new Article 49A. An MP elected for a party who leaves or ceases to belong to that party loses the Dewan Rakyat seat; an independent MP who later joins a party also faces a vacancy. The Constitution gives the Speaker a role in establishing a vacancy and notifying the Election Commission.
The law grew out of a period in which party and coalition realignments changed federal politics. The 2020 Sheraton Move was followed by Bersatu leaving Pakatan Harapan and the collapse of the Pakatan Harapan government. The 2022 amendment created a direct constitutional consequence for an individual federal MP who changes party membership after election.
The rule is narrower than a general requirement to support one government or vote with one’s party. It does not make a seat vacant solely because an MP is expelled, a party is dissolved or deregistered, or an MP resigns the party whip on becoming Speaker — those are the three exceptions Article 49A(2) actually lists. A change of coalition is not one of them, and because Act A1663 defined “political party” to include a registered coalition, how the Article applies when a whole party switches coalitions is unsettled. Analysts and legal commentators disagree about how far these exceptions limit the law’s practical effect; those assessments remain contested.
Later disputes have tested this distinction without turning every question into one case. In July 2024, the Speaker decided that the seats of six former Bersatu MPs were not vacant. In a separate dispute concerning four Sabah seats, the Federal Court in January 2026 refused Bersatu leave to appeal the Speaker’s no-vacancy decision; its majority held that the Speaker’s constitutional powers in that case were non-justiciable unless exercised outside those powers.
the working
What the sources say
established
The Dewan Rakyat passed the Constitution (Amendment) Bill (No. 3) 2022 on 28 July 2022 by 209 votes in favour, with no votes against and 11 MPs absent.
established
The Dewan Negara approved the Bill on 9 August 2022, with 52 of 60 senators voting in favour.
established
The Yang di-Pertuan Agong gave assent on 31 August 2022; the amendment was gazetted as the Constitution (Amendment) (No. 3) Act 2022 (Act A1663) on 6 September and came into force on 5 October 2022, except for the provision concerning the Eighth Schedule.
Constitution (Amendment) (No. 3) Act 2022 (Act A1663) · Bernama
established
Act A1663 inserted Article 49A into the Federal Constitution and amended Article 10 to permit provisions on party membership for members of Parliament.
Constitution (Amendment) (No. 3) Act 2022 (Act A1663) · Journal of the Malaysian Parliament
established
Under Article 49A, a Dewan Rakyat member elected as a member of a political party loses House membership and their seat becomes vacant if they resign from, or cease to be a member of, that party.
established
Article 49A also makes the seat of an MP elected as an independent vacant if that MP subsequently joins a political party.
established
Article 49A(2) lists exactly three situations in which a seat does not become vacant: the dissolution or cancellation of registration of the MP's political party; the MP's resignation from party membership upon election as Speaker; and the expulsion of the MP from the party. Leaving or changing a coalition is not among the three.
established
Act A1663 also amended Article 160(2) to add a definition of “political party”, and that definition expressly includes a coalition of such societies registered under federal law. Whether an MP is caught by Article 49A when their party leaves a coalition therefore turns on whether the MP is treated as having been elected as a member of the coalition or of a component party, which the Act does not resolve.
established
If the Speaker establishes that a casual vacancy has occurred under Article 49A, the Speaker must notify the Election Commission within 21 days; the vacancy is then filled under the constitutional rules for a by-election.
established
The amendment directly concerns membership and seats in the Dewan Rakyat; it does not itself require an MP to vote with a party or coalition, and analysts noted that MPs or whole parties can still support a different federal government without, solely for that reason, triggering Article 49A.
established
The 2020 episode commonly called the Sheraton Move involved political realignment including Bersatu’s withdrawal from Pakatan Harapan; it was followed by the collapse of the Pakatan Harapan federal government.
established
In introducing the Bill, the government described it as a measure to stop elected representatives from switching parties; the constitutional mechanism means individual MPs who leave their party after election can no longer retain the same Dewan Rakyat seat without facing a vacancy.
established
In July 2024, Dewan Rakyat Speaker Johari Abdul decided that the seats of six former Bersatu MPs were not vacant after Bersatu sought to have them declared vacant. The Speaker’s decision did not settle every future Article 49A dispute.
adjudicated
In a separate dispute over four Sabah parliamentary seats, the Federal Court in January 2026 refused Bersatu leave to appeal the Speaker’s decision that the seats were not vacant. By a 2–1 majority, the Court said the Speaker’s constitutional powers in that case were non-justiciable unless exercised outside those powers.
uncertain
Parliamentary debate and later Speaker decisions have raised the distinction between an MP’s expulsion and cessation of party membership, including where party constitutions contain automatic-termination clauses; the available record is too limited to establish a consistent rule across party constitutions.
uncertain
State anti-hopping provisions remain matters for individual state legislatures and are not guaranteed to remain aligned with the federal model; reporting records differing levels of state implementation.
where accounts differ
The parts nobody agrees on
contested
Former deputy minister Ong Kian Ming argued that the proposed Article 49A would have prevented the Sheraton Move; this is a counterfactual assessment rather than an adjudicated outcome, particularly because Article 49A does not treat a party’s coalition change as a seat vacancy.
contested
Constitutional lawyer Tengku Fuad Tengku Ahmad characterised the expulsion and coalition-change exceptions as significant loopholes, while the law’s supporters presented the amendment as a means to curb individual party switching.
contested
A 2024 ISEAS/CNA commentary argued that the law leaves scope for coalition or government changes without individual seat vacancies; whether that makes the law insufficient is an evaluative judgment, not a settled legal conclusion.
still being researched
- Whether Speakers and courts will develop a consistent approach to “ceased to be” membership and expulsion across party constitutions containing automatic-termination provisions.
- Whether Article 49A will materially reduce changes of federal government over several election cycles, given that coalition and confidence arrangements can change without an individual MP changing party membership.