The DPM dilemma

StickyUncategorized

Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has expressed hopes that the unity government will finish its full term. That’s left to be seen.

Anwar and his supporters want to project a narrative that the threat to the unity government originates externally. That may be true if Anwar’s leadership does not provide ammunition for detractors to seek an alternative.

Some of the decisions Anwar has made have far-reaching repercussions and they need to be examined to see if they put the nation and its institutions at risk. If they have, then MPs are justified and should seek a change of administration or a change of prime minister. If MPs don’t, they will not be living up to the expectations of the voters.

Consider the current state of the national leadership. The nation is now poised to have a prime minister who is facing 47 corruption charges in court involving Yayasan Akalbudi. Umno president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, who is facing these charges, is one of the two current deputy prime ministers. He is more senior in terms of rank and experience than the other DPM, Fadillah Yusof, who is from Gabungan Parti Sarawak(GPS).

Should anything happen to Anwar or he voluntarily resigns, who will take over? Zahid? Did the people vote for this? Did he get the mandate of the people or was this a decision that Anwar for his own reasons has imposed on the nation? Is this not risking the reputation of the nation and good governance that this nation is aspiring for?

If the unity government has set in place a succession plan in which Zahid is not the candidate to take over the premiership mid-term, the people need to know about it. But, if the candidate is Zahid, it is not the will of the people and Anwar’s decision threatens our democratic system of government.

No one should play God and believe fate will be in his or her favour. He or she should understand human limitations and make provisions for them. If anything happens to Anwar now, the nation would be stuck with an undesirable and unwanted prime minister — thanks to Anwar.

The people need to understand the gravity of the situation that Anwar has put the nation in.

Anwar has justified his decision by arguing that one is innocent until proven guilty. If so, march into court in the confidence that one is innocent and one has the evidence to prove it.

If a defendant is finding ways to escape conviction — as Zahid has attempted by sending a letter of representation to the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) requesting that the AGC drop the 47 charges against him in the Yayasan Akalbudi case — it would only raise public suspicion that he doesn’t think he is innocent.

In addition, Zahid’s party, Umno, has sent a request to the king for a royal pardon for its adviser, Najib Razak, who is in jail for his involvement in the SRC International case. The king should not forward the request to the Pardons Board of which he is chairman because, under the constitution, a political party can’t seek a pardon for any of its convicted members. That’s not the correct procedure. Yet, Zahid sidestepped the correct procedure to get what he wants. And Anwar kept his silence.

How could Anwar allow his DPM to disrespect the constitution and get away with it? It is dangerous to have such a politician in the Cabinet as he or she may use his or her influence and position to get what he/she wants and it may not be what the people want.

Zahid and others in Umno who are facing criminal charges in court have often justified their actions by claiming that their cases are politically motivated. That has now become a cliche. In politics, everything is politically motivated! The question to ask isn’t whether such cases are politically motivated but whether they are true or correct, and allow the courts to prove it so or otherwise.

Anwar’s silence perhaps is a demonstration of his own sense of ethics. He himself is facing a sodomy case in court and, therefore, is in no position to judge Zahid and other Umno members facing criminal charges in court or dismiss them. If he did, he would have to first dismiss himself, i.e. resign!

At the same time, one can not help but observe that should Zahid succeed in getting the AGC to drop the 47 charges against him, a precedent would be set and others facing criminal charges in court can do the same.

That would include Anwar and other politicians in his unity government who are facing criminal charges in court. It will also result in a long line of criminals seeking to drop charges against them.

That would be nothing but a mockery of our justice system. It is reckless irresponsibility to put the nation at risk by having such a candidate as a DPM who could become PM who mocks the AGC and the judiciary while the PM stands by silently.

This is the reason why politicians facing court charges should not be allowed to hold public office.

The people are witnessing first-hand how a compromised candidate will use position and influence to save himself or herself and set a precedent that should not have been set with no one stopping it.

It is, therefore, not surprising that there are efforts to change the current administration or, at least, the current PM.

Whether or not the PM’s position is at risk, Anwar has to act swiftly to choose the right candidate, after consultations with the partners in his unity government, to be the designated DPM who will take over from him as PM should it become necessary in the mid-term.

If he fails to correct the situation he has put the nation in, then, he gives MPs the right reasons to move against him. He would be inviting it.

Ruler-undang fued — did Umno have a basis?

Uncategorized,

Negeri Sembilan’s Ruler-undang issue that made headlines in the past week is essentially a succession and removal issue of the state Ruler. When Umno took up the issue, it turned political, dragging the MB into an issue that, perhaps, is out of his purview.

According to the state’s adat (customary traditions), the state has four chieftains who are the ruling chiefs of the traditional districts of Sungai Ujong, Jelebu, Johol, and Rembau. They form the powerful Undang Yang Empat (The Four Chieftains) who hold the constitutional power to elect or dismiss the state ruler, known as the Yang di-Pertuan Besar.

The controversy stems from a move by the traditional leadership of Sungai Ujong to remove its undang, Mubarak Thahak, citing alleged breaches of customary law and alleged violations of Islamic law in May, last year.

However, on April 17 this year, a special sitting of the Negeri Sembilan Council of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar and the Ruling Chiefs was convened, which was also attended by the state Menteri Besar Aminuddin Harun.

According to Aminuddin, the council had agreed to advise Sungai Ujong to accept Mubarak’s prior dismissal. This, however, was disputed by the other undangs, who claimed that the three undangs had not agreed to Mubarak’s dismissal, which was required by the state constitution and customary law.

The undangs subsequently made a declaration to dismiss the Yang di-Pertuan Besar, and named another candidate to replace him. By law, that declaration needed the MB’s signature, which was not given. The undangs also called for the MB’s removal, following which the state Umno’s 14 elected reps announced that they were withdrawing their support from Aminuddin’s administration for failing to handle the issue according to the constitution and customary law.

While both the Ruler and the undangs may have their reasons for acting the way they did, the question arises as to whether they followed due process in giving the other side their right to explain. This can only be resolved by both sides sorting things out and leaving it to them to do it without interference.

Against this background, did the 14 Umno representatives have a basis when they announced that they were withdrawing support for the MB? According to the law, the council decision is final and based on that, Aminuddin withheld his signature from announcing the dismissal of the Ruler by the undangs.

A more important consideration is whether the head of an elected government should take part in any process to install or dismiss the Ruler of the state? Constitutionally, the rulers of states in Malaysia are above politics and they rule outside the purview of an elected government. That is the separation of powers enshrined in the constitution.

According to the constitution, rulers don’t interfere with any matter of an elected government, as that is the total responsibility of the latter. Likewise, no elected representative or government representative interferes with any matter involving the Ruler. The exceptions are where the ruler and head of government have specific duties clearly defined in the constitution, such as the undangs requiring the MB’s signature.

In such cases, the ruler or the head of government operates according to the prescribed duties spelt out in the constitution. They should not use these exceptions as opportunities to influence government or ruler/royal processes. That precisely is what Aminuddin did. He did not step out of his prescribed role in the Negeri Sembilan Council of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar and the Ruling Chiefs.

If he had signed the undangs’ announcement to dismiss the incumbent Ruler, he would be interfering with the state Ruler’s succession and dismissal processes which are outside of the MB’s purview of administration.

If the separation of powers is respected, should the state Umno have taken offence at the MB for acting constitutionally? There, actually, was no basis for Umno to withdraw support for the government on this issue.

Thank goodness that good sense finally prevailed all around and the 14 Umno councillors in the state legislature retracted their withdrawal of support for the state MB! But, it was needless turmoil that the people could do without.

If the 14 had gone ahead and pulled out of the government, the government would have collapsed and there would have been political instability. To avert that possibility, the MB went to see the Ruler who advised continuing with a minority government. But the constitution provides no provision for a minority government unless it is supported by the majority of the elected representatives, which means it would be an unconstitutional government, and, therefore illegitimate and equally unstable.

All this instability is caused because leaders do not follow the constitution and, instead, seek the ruler’s help, who may not interpret the constitution according to democratic principles since their roles require an authoritarian approach. They mean well and their input is followed out of respect, nevertheless, the issue of government legitimacy and the stability it provides remains unresolved.

It is for the leaders to find the constitutional solution and advise the rulers/royals with the help of their legal advisers. They must under no circumstance support an unconstitutional government — even for the “good of the country” because the good of the country is to follow the constitution, as it protects the rights and interests of the people.

The point is that leaders, and especially elected representatives, need to understand the constitution and the principles on which it is built, such as the separation of powers and sovereignty of government, which applies to the state constitutions as well — and act or not act accordingly.

If they did, we would have less groundless political chaos and a more stable political environment.

It’s the Easter weekend

Uncategorized

Good Friday and the Sunday that follows are the most important dates in the Christian calendar. The Sunday after Good Friday is when Christians celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Without Good Friday, when Jesus Christ was crucified, there would be no Resurrection Sunday. So, both days are very important dates for Christians.

Easter is an ancient pagan practice of the Western culture before Christianity took over. Its symbols of eggs and rabbits suggest rebirth and fertility, which also came to be associated with the life of those who followed the resurrected Christ. Over time, Easter became synonymous with Resurrection Day and the name stuck to this day.

While Easter does not have the fanfare of Christmas, it is celebrated by Christians worldwide. In Malaysia, Easter is celebrated by Christians quietly, with the excitement found mostly in churches at the Easter services.

The event goes by mostly unnoticed as the 9.1% minority Christian population make time to remember the crucifixion of Christ on Good Friday and celebrate the resurrection of Christ and the joy and hope it promises on Easter Sunday.

The celebration is largely invisible in Peninsular Malaysia, as only 3% to 4% of the Christian population is found here.

The majority of Christians are found in Sabah and Sarawak and they are the majority in East Malaysia. About 25% of the population in Sabah are Christians, making them the largest significant minority group in the state. Christians, however, are a majority in Sarawak, making up over 50% of the population. (All statistics from AI-generated reports quoting the 2020 Malaysian Census.)

So, Easter is a big Christian celebration in East Malaysia. While it is not a fun feast like Christmas, it is the most significant feast in the Christian calendar and the basis of Christian faith.

It is only right to recognise the most important religious feast of the majority of fellow Malaysians in Sabah and Sarawak.

So, wishing you and all Christians here in Malaysia and all over the world, a blessed Christmas!

Selamat Hari Raya!

Uncategorized

It’s the time of celebration after the successful completion of the blessed fast for Muslims. Something must have been gained from the discipline of the fast and a reason to celebrate.

Apart from the religious significance, Malaysians join in to celebrate with those who celebrate or find in the long holidays the festive season offers to go out of town or join the balik kampung race to go back home or to a tourist destination!

So, drive safe, drink lots of coffee to stay alert on the roads and take enough water for the long drive. It was reported that more than three million cars were on the roads over the last few days. By now, they may have reached their destinations.

So, unpack, relax and just enjoy yourselves — the good food, the family ties and friendships. Another Malaysian festive season to savour!

Selamat Hari Raya!

MPs seek rethink on AG-PP and PM term limit bills

Uncategorized,

This week, the government introduced two institutional reforms bills, namely the Constitution (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2026 to separate the roles of the attorney-general (AG) and the public prosecutor (PP) and the Constitutional (Amendment) Bill 2026 which will limit a prime minister’s tenure to 10 years.

The bills were part of the reform agenda by Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim when he was in the Opposition and introduced now, after he became the PM. The bills are a step in the right direction, but the Opposition and some government backbenchers are calling for the government to make major amendments to the bills or postpone their tabling next week.

Opposition Perikatan Nasional chief whip Takiyuddin Hassan said that the AG-PP separation bill “does not show anything that would place accountability or a check and balance on the AG or PP” and that the prime minister’s term bill may be against the federal constitution as the latter does not state a term limit when the king exercises his discretion to appoint a PM.

Some critics may not agree with Takiyuddin, saying that the king’s discretion is conditional on the proof of support by the majority of the MPs, irrespective of a term limit. The issue of the king’s discretion is a sticky point in the appointment of a PM and needs to be revisited. All the more reason why the bills should be referred to a Parliament Special Select Committee (PSSC), where these issues should be resolved.

With regard to the AG-PP bill, Takiyuddin explained the issue of a lack of accountability at a press conference yesterday: “In the constitution, it is provided that a minister must be accountable to Parliament and the cabinet, but the public prosecutor does not have to be accountable to anyone.” (Malaysiakini, Feb 26)

Takiyuddin said the Opposition wants the government to postpone its plan to table the bills and to refer the AG-PP bill to a PSSC first for a thorough scrutiny before being tabled.

He added that the PM’s term limit bill needed refinement to ensure accountability.

At the same time, 10 MPs from the PM’s party, PKR, want the government to make amendments to the AG-PP bill before they would vote in favour of it.

The PKR MPs’ primary demand is for Parliament to be involved in the appointment of a public prosecutor. They want the candidates selected by the Judicial and Legal Service Commission (JLSC) — which currently selects the candidates for the post of AG and recommends them to the king for appointment — to undergo a televised public confirmation hearing before a PSSC.

Following the hearing, the MPs are proposing that the candidate secure a simple majority vote in the Dewan Rakyat before being presented for royal assent.

This is different from the bill, which gives the discretion to appoint to the king. Under the bill, “the public prosecutor will be appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, acting in his discretion, upon recommendation of the Judicial and Legal Service Commission and after consultation with the Conference of Rulers.” (Malaysiakini, Feb 23)

This suggests that the king has discretion over the JLSC’s recommendations. Some critics see this as unconstitutional as the constitution clearly states appointments are made according to the established conventions and on the advice of the PM.

The bill makes no mention of the constitutional requirement for the king to appoint on the advice of the PM.

If the appointments of the AG and PP, and the PM in the event of a hung Parliament, irrespective of a term limit, are left to the discretion of the king, questions will be raised as to whether these key leaders are democratically selected and fulfil constitutional requirements.

Some elements in both bills, as stated by the aforementioned MPs, do not make it clear that they fulfil constitutional and/or democratic requirements. Both the Opposition MPs and the 10 PKR MPs are right in proposing the amendments and requiring a PSSC to vet the bills thoroughly for conformity with the federal constitution.

It’s very disappointing that the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Azalina Othman Said who announced the tabling of the bill, did not ensure conformity with the constitution.

That should never have happened. Thankfully, the Opposition and the 10 PKR MPs caught the shortcomings that would have denied the people the mandate they give to their elected leaders to select their own leaders.

It is indeed brave of the 10 PKR MPs to stand up for the constitution and the democratic rights of the people over their own interests and the interests of the government they are a part of, where it conflicts with the interests of the people.

These MPs deserve to be recognised. The 10 PKR MPs are: Rafizi Ramli (Pandan), Wong Chen (Subang), Lee Chean Chung (Petaling Jaya), S Kesavan (Sg Siput), Onn Abu Bakar (Batu Pahat), Rodziah Ismail (Ampang), Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad (Setiawangsa), Zahir Hassan (Wangsa Maju), Hassan Karim (Pasir Gudang), and Bakhtiar Wan Chik (Balik Pulau).

Gong Xi Fa Cai, folks!

Uncategorized,

The fireworks are going off in my neighbourhood, which means the reunion dinners are over and celebrants are starting off the festivities with a soft prelude to the actual explosion of fireworks when the clock strikes midnight!

Some may still be on the road after the usual balik kampung congestion. Drive safe. The past few days, it was reported that over a million users were on the roads and highways out of Kuala Lumpur.

It was not just the Chinese going back home to celebrate the lunar new Year of the Horse. The other races, too, are taking advantage of the long holidays and going back home or just taking a break.

An interesting trend to note was the report early last week that more than three million vehicles were coming into the city! From elsewhere, they were converging on the city! These include KL residents returning home in KL! KL residents are no longer mostly transient residents who disappear to their homes in other parts of the country during a major festive holiday. KL now has its own sizeable home population who stays put here, with a number who balik kampung here!

Another reason given for the massive inbound traffic last week was that people were coming into KL for shopping! That — added to the outbound traffic — must have made it a crazy week on the roads in KL from last week up to now!

The roads are clear now in KL, but there will be a repeat after Chinese New Year.

So, folks, meanwhile, enjoy the food, family, a pleasant break and when returning, be prepared for a long drive and drive safe.

Gong Xi Fa Cai!

PN/Bersatu’s head-ache

Uncategorized, , ,

The Opposition Perikatan Nasional (PN) has been without a chairman since coalition party Bersatu chairman Muhyiddin Yassin resigned with effect from Jan 1, 2026.

No reason was given as to why Muhyiddin resigned, but the speculation is that it has to do with a tiff with PN’s anchor party, PAS, over Bersatu’s role in the coup that eventually led to Perlis’ PAS Menteri Besar Shukri Ramli’s resignation.

Eight assemblymen, five from Bersatu and three from PAS, from the 15-member Perlis assembly submitted statutory declarations (SDs) to the Raja of Perlis to indicate a loss of confidence in the MB, resulting in Shukri’s resignation.

As is now common in Malaysian politics where certain actions are not made public, who initiated the move to get the SDs to remove the MB is not publicly known.

Whether PN was aware of this move is another mystery, but PAS fired its three assemblymen whose seats were declared vacant by the state assembly Speaker. Bersatu was asked to do the same to its five assemblymen. Apparently Bersatu didn’t. What is known is that the Raja of Perlis had requested that Bersatu name its candidate for the MB’s post, which the party duly did and its candidate — Abu Bakar Hamzah — was appointed the next MB.

(There is no need for by-elections for the vacated seats if, according to the state constitution, two years or less is left before the state assembly is dissolved for the next elections.)

PAS members did not mince their words in criticising Bersatu for its lack of cooperation, and in that context Muhyiddin resigned.

Why Muhyiddin didn’t speak with his counterpart in PAS and sort out the issue is another mystery. It, however, shows that communication has apparently broken down between the two parties.

Muhyiddin did have a meeting with PAS leaders at his house two weeks ago. Both parties, however, had different interpretations of the meeting based on leaked correspondence. In a letter to PN party heads, Muhyiddin said the meeting decided to abolish the PN chairman’s post and replace it with a presidential council led by Bersatu and an executive council led by PAS.

Hadi responded to the letter in a letter that Muhyiddin’s proposal was neither discussed nor agreed to.

It has been a month since Muhyiddin’s resignation and while these exchanges carried on on who said what, the issue of finding a replacement for PN’s chairman post remains unresolved.

It’s imperative that PN calls for a supreme council meeting soon to decide on Muhyiddin’s resignation. PAS president Hadi Awang has declined the PN’s chairman’s post due to failing health. It only makes sense that the chairman is chosen — and chosen quickly — from the next line of leaders in the hierarchy since the presidents of the two major coalition parties are out of the running.

While they are at it, PN should also create a deputy chairman’s post so that he/she can take over if the chairman is indisposed in any way and removed or steps down. It is not wise for PN to be headless especially if the general election is suddenly called.

Meanwhile, Muhyiddin’s position as Bersatu president is becoming more uncertain. In light of Hadi’s response to Muhyiddin’s letter, Bersatu leaders want Muhyiddin to step down.

The call to Muhyiddin to step down isn’t recent. It began before the party’s annual general meeting in September last year, when Bersatu supreme council member Wan Saiful Wan Jan was said to have collected 120 SDs from Bersatu’s divisions, which featured a proposal not to discuss or nominate a prime minister candidate at the AGM.

In the midst of conflicting reports about the SDs, Wan Saiful clarified — at a press conference days after the AGM — that the collection of the SDs were misinterpreted as an effort to topple the president and that was why the president had said in his policy speech that party members were collecting signatures to unseat him. This had led to one person yelling, “Not true, not true” followed by others who had called on him to step down.

Wan Saiful had explained that there was nothing in the SDs asking Muhyiddin to step down, but that, for some reason, Muhyiddin went along with the false narrative created by some. Wan Saiful and a few others were subsequently sacked or suspended on grounds quoted in the party constitution but never explained.

If despite Wan Saiful’s clarification, he and others were expelled or suspended for the same reason, there is definitely something wrong with the way dissent and differences are managed in Bersatu.

Since then, there have been intermittent calls by divisions for Muhyiddin to step down but the latter has ignored them.

Against this background, the question is: Why is Muhyiddin hanging on to the president’s post when he has so poorly managed dissent in his party? Is it because he is misperceiving threats that are not there due to the influence of close key supporters?

At the same time, Muhyiddin faces corruption charges in court, which disqualify him from holding public office. He, however, may think that until found guilty, he could still be a PM-designate, and if he becomes a PM and is found guilty, he could get a royal pardon and continue on as PM. That is placing a great deal of stress on a still-new party. How are party members to sell their president to voters who previously faithfully voted for Umno but who have now switched to Bersatu, thinking the latter is a cleaner alternative?

If Muhyiddin wants to retain his position as party president, the best solution is to hold elections and open the contests for the top two positions. But that is not possible now, since he has declared no contest for the top two positions.

If he is unable to see things as they really are and face the realities surrounding his court case, and the latter is affecting his judgement to the point of risking his relationship with the head of the anchor party in PN, it may be a good idea for him to take time out and let his successor take over so that he can clear his head.

If his prospects then turn for the better, Muhyiddin can always come back, stand for election and get a fresh mandate to lead again.

Happy 2026! There’s light at the end …

Uncategorized

For the past five years, Malaysia has held on tenuously to three appointed governments, in that their prime ministers were not chosen by the majority of the MPs but appointed by the incumbent Yang DiPertuan Agong.

While it is constitutional for the king to appoint the prime minister and the Cabinet of the PM, what was never proven is whether the appointed PMs had the majority support of the MPs in the Dewan Rakyat, which is a constitutional requirement.

The first appointed government was led by the then Perikatan Nasional (PN) chairman and PN partner Bersatu president, Muhyiddin Yassin. He rallied the majority of the Malay parties to form a solid Malay-majority coalition which led a coup in 2020 against the first and incumbent Pakatan Harapan (PH) government helmed by Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Muhyiddin was the first to go to the palace with his list of statutory declarations (SDs), claiming he had a majority. Based on his claim, the palace closed the gates to the contender, Mahathir, who also claimed and declared at a press conference that he had a majority.

No avenue was available, nor a chance given to prove which of these claims was correct and Muhyiddin was appointed the PM. Two years later, his coalition partner Umno threatened to leave the government, and following negotiations, Muhyiddin resigned and a Umno candidate, Ismail Sabri, became the next PM.

Sabri called for general elections in 2022 which resulted in a hung Parliament between PH and PN and PH chairman Anwar Ibrahim, the current PM, was appointed by the king without proof of majority support of the MPs in the Dewan Rakyat.

All three governments claimed to have achieved political stability, which they used to justify the king’s appointment without proof of majority support. The appointments, however, were met with great public protests which ended Muhyiddin’s tenure but Anwar’s term continues on the strength of a memorandum of understanding that all his coalition partners had to sign to ensure he completes a full term.

The decisions Anwar made or did not make were also met with unhappiness, disappointment and frustration over the fact that he was not acting consistently with his party’s manifesto and professed reform agenda. The people’s constitutional right to change a government could not be effected because of the MoU.

Hence, the claim of political stability to justify the appointment of a PM and his Cabinet is merely a semblance of the truth achieved at the expense of the democratic processes of the people and the people’s helplessness at the hands of elected representatives who were unable to stop the appointing of a PM without proof of majority support. This lapse in democratic choice happened, not once but twice.

It is very likely that with a fragmented Malay majority, the outcome of the next general election will also be a hung Parliament. Once again, will the MPs go against the federal constitution and allow the king to appoint the PM without proof of majority? Or will the king have to depend on SDs and who gets to the palace first?

In the event of a hung Parliament, currently, the decision is left to the king to appoint the PM who he thinks has a majority as it is stated in the constitution. But “who he thinks” must have a democratic basis in that the MPs have made their choice very clear through a proper legal process. The latter process is what is missing in choosing a Malaysian PM and, in its absence, when the king appoints without proof of majority, the choice becomes undemocratic.

There is only one solution to the problem of finding out which PM-designate has the support of the majority of the MPs: A confidence vote.

Unlike other democracies in the world, Malaysia has no legal provision for the Dewan Rakyat and/or MPs to call for a confidence vote to test the support of the PM among the MPs. In its absence, the choice of a PM, which constitutionally should be made by the MPs, will by default fall into the hands of the king.

In 2020, if a confidence vote had been called in the Dewan Rakyat, it would have proven whether Muhyiddin or Mahathir had the majority support. In 2022, likewise, a confidence vote would have clearly produced a PM of the choice of the people.

This is the apparent solution, but which MPs with uncertain people’s support will not want to introduce, as they may not want to offend the royal institution who they depend on to appoint the PM.

The deference to the royals, however, may be more cultural than factual. Malaysia’s royalty surely understands that they are the custodians of the people’s democratic institutions, conventions and processes and will or will have to respect the decisions the people make through their elected representatives to put into place laws and legal provisions that facilitate their democratic choice.

The MPs choose the PM. The king gives his stamp of approval that it was democratically done and appoints him.

This is the light at the end of the dark five-year tunnel Malaysia has gone through since 2020. It is the solution that is probably in the minds of the MPs, but which they may be reluctant to resolve for fear of resistance.

But 2026 calls for a determination and leadership on the part of the MPs to bring about a resolution and rally among themselves to put in place a law to call for a confidence vote. If MPs on both sides of the divide come together with a single-minded commitment to introduce such a law, the government and Speaker will have to take note and back it.

It will facilitate the installation of a democratic government with the mandate of the people in the event of a crisis outside of a general election. It would be a democratic, legitimate and constitutional government, sovereign and one which precludes external interferences or manipulation by any source in the choice of the PM, thus providing the unquestionable basis for political stability.

If the MPs are serious about strengthening the electoral processes of the people and establishing a stable government, they will enact a law for the calling of a confidence vote. It will bring about the much-needed stability that has eluded us for the past five years!

That’s my 2026 wish for Malaysia. Light at the end of the tunnel!

It’s that time of the year again

Uncategorized

The year has come to an end, school break will begin soon and Christmas is around the corner to add that jolly spirit to a wet December. It’s that time when one does not have to take things seriously.

Life is famous for throwing lemons at us; it is inescapable reality, but what is also reality is that we have it in us to make the best of it. The Christmas season at the end of the year is an ideal time to take a little escape from whatever our circumstances are and find some relief.

All the Christmas decor in shopping complexes, Christian homes and some churches create a make-believe atmosphere of something out of this world yet close at hand. It is common knowledge that Christmas is when Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ from the Other World. For us, it is not just a fantasy and a delightful and, perhaps, needful escape but a celebration of the hope we have for here and now and the beyond.

Yet, it is a celebration for anyone to enjoy, whether or not they understand the religious meaning. So, enjoy it. Don’t mind the commercialness of some of the celebrations. It’s a pleasant distraction and might be just what you need.

For me, it’s a time when I choose to forget about politics in this country by not commenting on it. So, there will be no political commentary here this month. In this season, I don’t let politics bother me. This year, I figured, I have written whatever I needed to express. Now, I’ll sit back, enjoy the season and — as is often advised — to leave it to God to do the rest!

Season’ greetings!

It’s back to the status quo in Sabah

Uncategorized,

The results of Sabah’s state elections yesterday (Nov 29) returned Gabungan Rakyat Sabah (GRS) to power. GRS, which fielded the largest number of candidates implicated in alleged corruption videos, led the pack by winning 29 seats, but short of eight of the 37 needed for a simple majority to form the state government.

Ten candidates implicated in videos depicting alleged corruption revealed by businessman Albert Tei, stood for election. All but one were from GRS. Eight, including Parti Solidariti Tanah Airku (Star) president, Jeffrey Kitingan, won their seats. Those from GRS who won included GRS chairman Hajiji Noor.

Apparently, the video scandals had minimal electoral impact, with voters being more concerned over bread and butter issues.

So, Sabah will get a GRS-led government for a second term. So far, Hajiji has the official support of Pakatan Harapan’s (PH) sole candidate, Star’s two seats and Upko’s three seats giving it 35 seats, still short of two for a simple majority to form the state government.

There were reports that Hajiji has the support of five independents, but there were no public announcements. Perhaps that gave him his needed majority as he was sworn in as the chief minister in the early hours of the morning.

Following Hajiji’s swearing-in, there has been, as of now (10pm, Malaysian time), no official announcement of his majority government. A late report stated that Barisan Nasional with six seats, too, might be backing him. But, nothing official has been stated.

According to some analysts, new trends in this election indicate a strong youth influence, a Chinese swing which abandoned the DAP, which won no seats, and supported Warisan, and rejection of all Peninsula-based parties. These factors, they say, would make it very challenging for GRS to deliver according to expectations.

Well, Sabahans have spoken, and if GRS doesn’t deliver, they have a chance to correct their choice in the next state elections.