On March 2, our lawmakers had a chance to do something truly game changing for local politics.
The Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2026 was supposed to be the moment we finally put an expiration date, or a best before date, on the prime minister’s office. Capping the PM’s tenure at 10 years was a major reformasi promise.
It was meant to be the change so that we will never see a 22-year-old rule again. It was meant to make sure that nobody spends too much time in power and make them feel so comfortable and entitled that they forgot why they were put in power in the first place.
In order to pass a constitutional amendment, you need a two-thirds majority. In our current 222 seat Dewan Rakyat, that magic number is 148.
The government walked into the hall with an expected 154 seats in the bank. They did not just have the numbers; they had a safety net. Yet, when it ended with 146.
I have been a lecturer for more than 20 years and I have heard every excuse possible when students are absent from class or did not submit assignments on time.
I’ve become so good at sniffing out the lame excuses from the legitimate reasons. And this vote in Dewan Rakyat smelled a bit lame.
Government spokesperson Fahmi Fadzil later said that several backbenchers were simply “stuck in traffic”, which is highly plausible in the chaotic Kuala Lumpur traffic, but we are talking about an extremely iconic law change here.
It is a move that definitely required months of briefing, cabinet meetings, and international signalling.
Yet, the traffic still won. If our national destiny can be stopped by a heavy downpour or a slow-moving Perodua Myvi on Federal Highway, we have a problem.
Then, there was Bukit Gantang MP Syed Abu Hussin Hafiz Syed Abdul Fasal. He did not blame the traffic. He was honest. He skipped the vote because he wanted the PM to stay in power longer.
He said that if someone is doing a good job, why not just keep him in power. Hilarious, and maybe suspicious statement from an independent MP.
Confused opposition
All this also meant that there were 44 opposition MPs who abstained. Apparently, they were confused and there was a misunderstanding over whether a 10-year limit was actually a 10-year guarantee.
If our lawmakers struggle to see a difference like that in Parliament, we seriously need to take a look at our education system.
To understand why this failure is such a, well, huge failure, we need to understand the context. We lived through 22 years of the first Dr Mahathir Mohamad era, followed by a 22-month sequel that ended dramatically.
So, this bill was supposed to address a problem like that.
It was supposed to show that Malaysia had finally matured into a democracy where the office is bigger than the man.
By failing to pass the bill, we did not just delay it, we have shown that we’re still not there yet when it comes to political maturity and realisation.
Self-sabotage?
But if we look closer and think about it more, this failure could be a suspiciously well-executed plan. Usually, losing a bill like this (like the budget for example) means that a sitting prime minister or government does not have enough support in Parliament.
Now hear me out. Maybe, by losing out by just two votes, especially when there were 32 MPs who were absent, the government has managed to keep the reform rhetoric alive as a promise without actually having to live with it as a law. Think about the narrative this creates.
The ruling party can now hit the campaign trail with a frustrated spirit, portraying a hardworking hero who fought for reforms but was denied.
It turns a legislative defeat into a battle cry and it gives them a reason to ask for a clearer mandate in the next election.
So, does that mean that an election could be coming soon? You can usually tell when one is approaching. If your normal drive to work suddenly feels so smooth because the potholes have disappeared, it’s probably time.
Other indications could be more allocations given for strategic areas in the country.
I just feel that it is quite impossible for a government that is focused on long-term governance losing by only two votes. They would have made sure that everything goes smoothly without a hitch.
They would whip their MPs into shape and make sure everyone was there. They would have also made sure briefings made to the opposition lawmakers were as clear as can be. You just do not leave an iconic constitutional amendment like this to chance.
You would not go into this without being absolutely sure that it would get passed convincingly (remember Undi18 was convincingly passed).
I don’t have as much credibility as so many other political observers and analysts in the country, and so this is just my humble opinion.
Who knows, but I could be totally wrong in my assumption. I mean, the government did say that they will table the bill again in the Dewan Rakyat in June.
But if this is indeed the start of election season. we can expect more obvious indications. I would be excited. Elections always excite me.
I just hope that when the time comes for the people to vote, we do not find ourselves stuck in traffic or getting confused by whatever manifesto that is presented. - Mkini
ZAN AZLEE is a writer, documentary filmmaker, journalist and academic. Visit fatbidin.com to view his work.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.