Understanding Political Gridlock in Malaysia

On November 19th, tens of thousands of Malaysians assembled in the

capital to protest the 1MDB scandal and demand for free and fair
elections. The prime minister, Mr. Najib Razak, is engulfed in a global
financial scandal which the U.S. Department of Justice called a massive
fraud. At least $3.5 billion has been stolen and misappropriated from a
state-owned sovereign fund, in which Mr. Razak is chair. And yet, Mr.
Razaks ruling coalition looks set to prevail in the next General Election to
be held by May 2018.

To the outsider, Malaysia is a bewildering case of stagnation. Of the

multiple other countries in which authorities are investigating the 1MDB
fraud, Singapore has shut down two major banks due to money laundering
charges related to 1MDB, the first time they had done so in 32 years.1 U.S.
authorities, including the FBI, moved to seize real estate and luxury
properties purchased by using the siphoned funds. Switzerlands Office of
Attorney General recently expanded its criminal probe and suspected a
Ponzi scheme.2 In the home turf, however, where the impact and
outrage should be most felt, no one has been held accountable or
prosecuted for the gross mismanagement of billions of public funds. The
only ones being punished are the most vocal critics, including the
dismissal of several of Mr. Razaks cabinet ministers, as well as an
opposition Member of Parliament who was slapped with 18 months jail
sentence for leaking a page of an audit into the ruined financial
conglomerate. Three out of four figureheads of the special taskforce setup
to investigate 1MDB were replaced within months.

Why is this so? I argue Malaysias political gridlock is prolonged largely by

four factors: electoral malpractices, institutional failures, political
fragmentation, and societal faultlines. Until and unless these are changed,
reforms are flimsy at best, and cosmetics at worse.

Electoral malpractices: Keeping the incumbent in their seat

In the previous General Election, the ruling coalition won 47% of the
popular vote but nearly 60% of the parliamentary seats. The opposition
coalition won 51% of the votes but only 40% of the seats (The remaining
2% were split among marginal parties). The discrepancy is caused by the
uneven weightage of popular representation. A constitutional clause
grants over-representation for rural voters either spanning a large
landmass or difficult to reach areas. However, even after taking this
clause into account, the electoral malpractices are severe. We can identify
two types of malpractices: malapportionment and gerrymandering.

1 http://fortune.com/2016/10/11/1mdb-singapore-dbs-ubs-falcon-bank/
2 http://www.wsj.com/articles/swiss-attorney-general-expands-probe-of-
malaysias-1mdb-fund-1476278859
In the study which I co-wrote with fellow analysts from Penang Institute,
we found that at least 68 parliamentary seats and 162 state seats are
either excessively under-represented or excessively over-represented
under the latest redelineation exercised proposed by the Election
Commission. If the proposal comes into effect during the next General
Election, the outcome is effectively a forgone conclusion because of
severe malapportionment and gerrymandering.

Malapportionment is disparity of constituency size caused by redelineation

exercise. It results in inequitable representation because it provides
unequal vote value. For example, 1 voter in Putrajaya has a value
equivalent to 9 voters in Kapar as both constituencies have one seat each
even though Putrajaya has roughly 15,991 voters and Kapar has 144,159
voters.

Even within the same state, the disparity of constituency size is striking.
In the state of Selangor, the proposed P106 Damansara is four times the
size of P092 Sabak Bernam. Any of the three excessively under-
represented parliamentary constituencies in Selangor are bigger than the
three small constituencies combined.

This is not a purely mathematical disparity of constituency size. It is a

deliberate packing of opposition supporters into mega-size constituency,
diluting their reach in other seats, making the neighboring marginal seats
more winnable to the ruling coalition. Not surprisingly, Damansara is held
by the opposition and Sabak Bernam is held by the ruling party.

Gerrymandering is the practice of deliberately drawing constituency

boundaries based on voting pattern of constituents so that a party may
benefit. This is done in Malaysias redelineation exercise in three ways:
constituencies spanning multiple local authorities, arbitrary combination
of communities without common interests, and partition of local
communities and neighborhood. Voters living on the same street find
themselves on different electoral constituencies. The confusion is
compounded by the lack of information and publicity on the changes
made to constituency boundaries and, crucially, voting districts.

Political Fragmentation: Weaker and disunited opposition

Given the steep electoral obstacles which the opposition has to overcome,
it is no surprise that the National Front is one of the longest ruling
coalition in the world. The then fully united opposition coalition, Pakatan
Rakyat, failed to unseat BN in the 2013 General Election. Any hope of
taking advantage of Mr. Razaks crisis is dampened with the collapse of
Pakatan Rakyat due to a quarrel over a Chief Ministers position and an
Islamist partys insistence to push for the implementation for Hudud laws.
To fully absorb the stormy developments, and the irony of it all, requires a
bit of history. Pakatan Rakyat is made up of an Islamist party (the Pan-
Malaysian Islamic Party, PAS), a social democrat (Democratic Action Party,
DAP) and a centrist party (Peoples Justice Party, PKR).

For many years, PAS is the only party that rivals UMNO (the dominant
party of the ruling BN) among the Malay grassroots, who form more than
50% of the registered voters. Bitter disagreements within PAS led to a
splinter party, Amanah, formed in late 2015. PAS is vehemently opposed
to DAP and Amanah.

DAP holds the sway among a majority of Chinese or/and urban voters, but
is bedeviled among rural or/and conservative Malays.

Malaysian United Indigenous Party (popularly known as Bersatu), the new

party led by ousted Deputy Prime Minister Mr Muhyddin Yassin and
Malaysias longest reigning Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamed, is an
UMNO splinter. Both ex-UMNO top guns were routinely condemned by DAP
and PKR, but they are now working together to change the government. In
fact, there is no greater irony that Mr Mahathir wearing a Free Anwar
badge (his nemesis whom he first condemned to jail and accused of
sodomy and corruption) and rallying the crowd in Bersih 5 demonstration
(during his reign, he ordered FRU to open water canon and tear gas and
ruled demonstrations as an illegal attempt to overthrow the government).

Amidst the open animosity between the opposition parties (essentially,

they are just anti-Najib/anti-UMNO parties), PKR is negotiating a miracle.
PKR is appealing for a one-on-one fight in the next election; a scenario
which the most hardcore opposition supporter would find unlikely.

PAS is set to contest against DAP and Amanah. And it remains to be seen
which party is willing to give seats for two new parties (Bersatu and
Amanah) to contest. After all, despite being the cornerstones of the
coalition, DAP and PKR wrestled for seats in the Sarawak state election,
further damaging whatever trust and solidarity left in the opposition. The
status quo is now Pakatan Harapan + 1, which PKR, DAP and Amanah
formed a coalition with the tacit support of Bersatu working to dethrone
Mr Najib. PAS, whose grassroots support and Islamic State rhetoric are not
to be under-estimated, has been giving different signals and would likely
to play the role of third party spoiler.

Which leads to the all-important question. What if PAS decides to work

with the opposition against Mr Najib? Would the opposition concedes and
let PAS has their way in Kelantan? Or if PAS decides to be third party, will
the split among opposition votes be a field day for Mr Najib?

If the seizure of two state governments, progress and power did not fail to
stop PAS (in fact, conservatives see them as losing influence), what
would? PAS is unlikely to be back to the fold, so Mr Najibs best bet is for
PAS to stand as third party playing the spoiler. If PAS explicitly teamed up
with UMNO, however, there is some hope that their grassroots and
longtime supporters (who viewed UMNO as traditional enemy for more
than fifty years now) may vote for the opposition coalition as a protest
against their leadership.

Institutional failures: Culture of unaccountability, graft and state

repression

Malaysias history of concentrated powers are not something new. The

Sedition Act, which criminalizes any speech deemed hateful or
contemptuous towards the Ruler or Government, are routinely abused due
to its vague clauses. Stretching from the colonial era, prime ministers
after prime ministers have not only not repeal the relics from colonialism,
but relished in its sweeping powers. Another colonial legacy, the notorious
detention without trial, gave powers to the executive to imprison political
opponents for lengthy periods without a day in the courtroom. Most
recently, the leader of a civil rights movement calling for free and fair
elections, Maria Chin Abdullah, was detained under SOSMA. The repeal of
infamous Internal Security Act (ISA) was subsequently replaced by SOSMA,
POTA, and NSC.

The Mahathir administration rapidly expanded the executive powers, so

much so that he was powerful enough to remove the constitutional
immunity of the Rulers and, by all purposes, sacked the Lord President
and Chief Judge of the country at his will. Today, those emasculation of the
executive haunts him and country.

Former Attorney General, Mr Gani Patail, was terminated just as he was

allegedly drafting a charge sheet against Mr Najib.3 Malaysian Anti-
Corruption Commission beared the brunt of a government which refuses
to concede its mistake and not only fails to be ashamed of its
accountability, but to stay in power by whatever means. The investigating
officers home was raided by the police, senior officers were transferred
out to other agencies, and the anti-graft chief was replaced.4

The special taskforce investigating 1MDB disbanded as suddenly as it was

announced. The various institutions that were supposedly held the
government accountable have faltered in one way or the other. Either the
institutions were bought in and aided its prosecution, or toothless to fight
the State Leviathan. The concentration of power has served the executive
ruthlessly, enabling it to dismiss critics at the time they posed a threat to
actually hold it accountable.

3 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/28/former-malaysian-
attorney-general-planned-charges-against-pm-report
4 http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/malaysia-s-anti-
graft/2997180.html
The institutional failure includes that of the media. Some fought and went
down bravely, like The Malaysian Insider. Newspapers editors were called
in for investigation for reports on 1MDB. Mainstream press were owned by
the powers-that-be or intimidated by the massive laws at their disposal
and feared a repeat of Operation Weed 1989, which detained over 100
dissidents and shut down several newspapers.

Institutional failure and lack of accountability is not just limited to 1MDB.

Year after year, the Auditor General revealed staggering cases of
mismanaged public funds. Government bodies bought wall clocks at RM
3,810 a piece (market price easily below RM 100) and scanners RM 14,670
(RM 200).5 This is what I call the normalization of corruption. What would
have been an epidemic in Japan and heads rolling in South Korea, has
become so normalized in Malaysia from top to bottom, so much so that
the government, authorities and even agencies which supposed to uphold
accountability shrugged it off. In the newly released report, the auditors
found that the Federal Land Development Authority (FELDA) lost hundreds
of millions due to multiple transactions without proper authorization,
dubious planning and execution, and complete mismanagement.6 It made
news for 2-3 days before disappearing, like pretty much everything.
Corruption, corruption revealed, outrage, no institution of accountability,
move on. It has become normal.

As the 1MDB saga thrown into full-blown crisis, the Malaysian parliament
passed the National Security bill, which authorizes the Prime Minister to
declare a state of emergency as he deems necessary when security is
threatened. Comes GE14, assuming the best case scenario, will Malaysias
institutions have any strength to resist the final nail on the coffin if the
executive refuses to adhere to a peaceful transition of power?

Societal faultlines: One cleavage too many

The faultlines are too many and too much. Due to this, Mr Najib can easily
turn a unified opposition against one another. Dr Jamil Khir Baharom, a
minister in charge of religious affairs under Mr Najibs cabinet, paraded a
bill amendment to increase the power of the Shariah court. PAS long
dream to establish Islamic State by implementing Islamic law, which
cannot be fully enforced with the current restriction on the maximum
punishments it can spell out. Under the revised version of the proposed
amendment, the Shariah court will be strengthened by raising the
punishment ceiling to 30 years in prison, RM100,000 fine and 100 strokes
of caning.7 Mr Najibs olive branch to PAS is working, enticing the party
from cooperation with opposition thus depriving their strength among

5 http://blogs.wsj.com/indonesiarealtime/2013/10/03/malaysia-auditors-
accuse-government-of-wasteful-spending/
6 http://www.nst.com.my/news/2016/11/190618/felda-lost-millions-due-
poor-planning-execution
7 http://www.todayonline.com/world/asia/pas-chief-tables-hudud-bill-third-
time-proposes-stiffer-penalties
Malay and rural areas. Malaysias No.2 has also implicitly facilitating the
bill on behalf of PAS. Whatever PAS soured ties with the opposition, their
chief has made a 180 degree turn on previously progressive stance such
as street demonstration.

In Malaysia where nearly everything is seen through the lens of race and
religion, the push for Islamic law will effectively split the society. It doesnt
help that all Malays are Muslims in this country where ones professed
religion is one of the constitutional definitions of being a Malay.

The heated rhetoric has been drawn along religious lines. So does the
racial lines. In the run-up to the November 19 rally, thugs dressed in red
threatened the Bersih convoy. The Red Shirts, as they came to be known,
are all Malays led by an UMNO division head. Threats of violence aside,
the racial rhetoric has become too discomforting. Last year, what was a
typical robber and shopkeeper brawl turned dangerously into racial
gatherings as the two groups called their friends and there was a mini-riot
at night. In the aftermath of the previous election, the Prime Minister and
the partys de facto mouthpiece, Utusan Malaysia, denounced the Chinese
as a scapegoat of opposition agent. All these societal faultlines testify to
the enormity of the task of the opposition to unseat Mr Najib.

If we have any indicator how the upcoming election might turn out, the
by-elections this year might provide some hint. Mr Najibs coalition won
both of them. I was in the sub-urban and outskirts of town, when
opposition parties held a town hall panel session, inevitably speaking in
English, touching on issues such as the removal of the Attorney General.
While these are big, national issues, it felt out of place with a visible gap
between the politicians, the city folks, and the demonstrators so urgently
and desperately want reforms and the voters there, voted for Mr Najibs
coalition to the aforementioned factors. And plainly, people dont mind as
long as they are not affected in the most immediate and personal level.
The whole 1MDB has been too complicated to be explained to non-English
literate voters in a 5-minute rally, with no understanding of the complex
technical terms. Financial scandals grew more complicated and people
just lose interest. Maybe they underestimate the cost of it all, maybe they
dont care enough or dont lose enough, either way they are not angry
enough to want to change the status quo.

Whats next? Even the unholy alliance between Mr Anwar and Mr Mahathir
wont be able to fight off the structural inequality. If political change is not
sufficient, will it take an economic downturn to bring change in Malaysia,
like Indonesia? In 1998, a combined factor of internal dissidents and
economic instability brought the dictatorial Suharto era to an end and
ushered the Reformasi period. If neighboring Indonesia can live embedded
in a dictatorship for forty years and underwent rapid democratization in so
short a time, we cant and shouldnt rule anything out yet in Malaysia. It
will be a miracle however.
Ooi Kok Hin is an analyst with the Penang Institute. He writes on political
and social developments, Southeast Asian affairs and the personal and
the thoughtful, as well as an author and columnist.