The way Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim managed or failed to manage the Allah word on socks and heel issues should have given the Opposition, namely Perikatan Nasional (PN), a very good reason to demand for his resignation.

That didn’t happen. Yet, PN’s reaction is not unexpected. PN commendably refrained from taking political mileage from the earlier mentioned two issues and stayed above the fray.

There could be a couple of reasons for PN’s inaction. Firstly, responsibly, it didn’t want to worsen the situation and showed remarkable calm in not agitating its members to react.

Secondly, PN perhaps knows with the Memorandum of Understanding that prevents parties from voting against Anwar, it would be difficult to muster a convincing majority to seek the resignation of the PM.

Getting a convincing majority must become PN’s primary objective. There are two strategies it can employ to achieve this objective. Firstly, PN must demonstrate a strong and fearless leadership in complying with the federal constitution, and, secondly, it must develop strategies to attract the moderate Malays and non-Malays to win by-elections.

PN’s lacklustre performance particularly on constitutional issues in debates in the Dewan Rakyat will give no MP contemplating a switch to another party a convincing reason to join PN because the MP will have no confidence that PN will back him/her on the strength of constitutional correctness.

Even in the debates on an issue very close to the hearts of people as the amendments to the Citizenship bill, PN MPs had little to contribute. The protests came largely from the government bench and from mostly its supporters.

If PN wants to form a government but does not know the federal constitution adequately to know how to defend itself according to the correct interpretations of the federal constitution, it will fail to win the confidence of the people — and the MPs — and, consequently, their support.

PN MPs were also silent in the debate on the amendments to the Police Act 1967, which included a new clause which makes the Yang di-Pertuan Agong the honorary commissioner-in-chief of the Royal Malaysia Police.

The new clause was not touched during the debate on the bill. How can the king be debated? No MP in his/her right mind will debate on the king. The constitution does not allow it. So what was the rationale of the government to introduce a clause for debate when our laws do not allow it?

Such inconsistencies should be immediately pointed out to show the lack of proper understanding of the constitution in the introduction of an amendment that should not have been tabled in the first place. The king is king of all. Why should he be demoted to a position as honorary commissioner-in-chief of the police? The king can’t be debated but the government’s intention can be questioned.

It is very likely that PN MPs kept silent because it involves the king. But MPs need to understand that it is not the king who is being questioned but the government.

When it comes to the king, MPs may not even want to be seen as expressing a negative reaction for fear of losing his support in the event they need to form a government mid-term. That simply reveals the ignorance of the MPs of the federal constitution and their lack of confidence as a result of it.

The federal constitution is explicit: The king appoints the MP who has the support of the majority of the MPs. If they have a majority, MPs must be confident of their constitutional right to form a government. If the king goes against it, the king is acting unconstitutionally and the MPs must know what to do to act constitutionally.

The king’s hand in the appointment of the prime minister can only be an issue if the MPs let him. Knowing that, MPs, and, especially PN MPs, must learn to confidently act constitutionally.

PN’s success so far has been on the back of its component partner PAS’ groundswell of support. PAS’ support comes mostly from the conservative segment of the Malay-Muslim population. It won four states in the north in the 2022 general election.

While it helped PN win more seats, it was unable to help PN form the state governments in Selangor and Negeri Sembilan. According to political analysts the main reason for this is that PAS’ support had plateaued out.

If PN is going to depend on PAS to deliver the votes in the future, PN is going to be disappointed. PN’s other component partner, Bersatu, must build itself up by reaching the less conservative segments of the Malay population and non-Malays. These segments include the urban Malays who may reject PAS as too conservative and outdated.

So, in the coming by-elections, it is imperative that PN fields Bersatu candidates not PAS candidates. This should be tested in the May 11 by-election in Kuala Kubu Baharu (KKB).

With current sentiments for the Pakatan Harapan (PH)-led unity government at an increasingly descending low, a Bersatu candidate who can appeal to both Malay and non-Malay voters will have a high chance of tipping the swing votes in PN’s favour. Voters are increasingly disgruntled with the current administration. They will give their votes to better alternatives.

Now is the time to prove that Bersatu is a worthy choice. If Bersatu wins KKB, it will be a very strong indication that the voters are turning away from PH, which means the party’s success in KKB may be repeated in subsequent by-elections.

Bersatu must show its leadership qualities and be able to appeal to a broader cross-section of voters if it wants to lead a government of the people for the people.