Introduction

Malaysia’s 15^th General Election (GE15), which was held on 19 May 2022, saw an unprecedented hung parliament with no single political coalition winning a simple majority to form the government. After five days of deadlock, the political impasse ended after meetings upon meetings between the coalitions and the King. On 24 November, the King finally swore in Anwar Ibrahim, leader of the Pakatan Harapan (the Alliance of Hope – PH) coalition as the 10^th Prime Minister of Malaysia.  

At present, the newly minted Prime Minister is taking the lead toward national reconciliation by forming a unity government comprising Barisan Nasional (the National Front – BN), its former political opponent, and Gabungan Rakyat Sabah (Sabah People’s Alliance – GRS). He has also left the door open for other political parties to join his unity government.

Such a gesture is applaudable but it is also because PH does not have the number of seats to form a government, with only 82 seats to its name. Although a minority government is not impossible in a Westminster parliamentary system, it has never occurred in Malaysia. More importantly, the King has urged the various political coalitions to form a unity government.

A unity government would provide the PH coalition with a stronger mandate to stabilize and bring the nation forward.  By any measure, this is a good start to restoring the political stability in the country. However, challenges facing the newly minted Prime Minister and the PH-led government are abundant and this short article will address only a few of these challenges.

The Cabinet

Anwar’s immediate challenge is navigating the delicate balance of forming a cabinet of ministers compromising capable Members of Parliaments and appeasing his former political opponents. To form a unity government would mean that non-PH Members of Parliament would have to be appointed to the Cabinet. The prime minister would perhaps have to convince his coalition allies to compromise some cabinet positions although this could potentially ruffle feathers.  

At the same time, he must also ensure that he is appointing candidates with the right calibre to perform instead of just focusing on satisfying the competing demands of the various political coalitions. As PH requires the support of its own coalition allies and from other coalitions, Anwar may likely have to form a big Cabinet. Alternatively, he may have to appoint some of these MPs to government-linked companies as a gesture of appreciation.

He may of course justify it as a cabinet that truly represents a unity government. But a bloated Cabinet would dent PH’s popularity. It may even be interpreted as a continuation of cronyism instead of reform. Conversely, a lack of reward for his former nemesis and political allies in positions of power would cost him the support that he needs.

Narrowing the Gap of Polarization

The second challenge is narrowing the gap of polarization. The GE15 electoral results have shown the racial and religious fault lines in the country after years of intense politicization. Perikatan Nasional (the National Alliance – PN), comprising Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party – PAS) and Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (Malaysian United Indigenous Party – Bersatu), won 73 seats in the election and this illustrates how the conservative political ideology that rallied around race and religion is still popular among a sizable number of Malay voters.

After being so close to forming the government, (PN) would likely harden its conservative slant to set itself apart from PH and to appeal to its voters based. Any major revision of policies that may not necessarily privileged the Malay-Muslim community can be used against PH.

PH which advocates for needs-based policies and holds more progressive political values will have the unenviable task to appease the PN supporters.  While granular data is not easily available yet, there is also the need to study if such a trend is also common among younger Malay voters. If it is, the PH-led government not only faces the challenge of convincing the older generations of staunch PN supporters but also finds ways to convince the younger voters that needs-based policies and race and religion agenda are not necessarily mutually exclusive.  

Furthermore, the enduring polarization and mutual suspicions between the PH and BN may impede the implementation of reforms. It is naïve to imagine that BN, a junior partner within this unity government, will obediently submit to the dominance of a PH government. Furthermore, BN, with UMNO as the dominant party, is unlikely to shift from centre-right to centre-left positions so easily. Doing so will make UMNO even less appealing to the Malay voters. Thus, PH will have some serious work to do to assure the Malay voters that their interests will be taken care of.

Managing Rising Competing Demands

Apart from managing the political elites, Anwar and his team also have to manage the growing competing demands from the public. From educationists who demand revision to the curriculum to women’s rights groups who demand citizenship for children born overseas by Malaysian mothers, the PH-led government could not ignore these growing demands and it must show that it will fulfil its promises. 

However, policy changes often require some form of trade-off and it is unlikely to satisfy all quarters. Criticisms to any policy changes will continue just as how it has been under the previous regime, if not worse. The challenge then is to really convince and educate the public why certain policy changes are necessary.

With the high expectation from the public, the PH government would have to make serious calculations on how much and how far they can push for reform. Bold reforms may be necessary to bring significant changes but they could further entrench existing polarization. Conversely, slow and piecemeal changes will fail to impress their supporters. Apart from that, the most dangerous alternative is making populist policy changes to satisfy the demands of the public and to gain support.

Inflation and Costs of Living

Finally, inflation and costs of living are something that the PH-led government must address urgently. Previous regimes have relied on cash handouts to support lower-income households or more popularly known as the Bottom (B40). Such a measure may be useful in the immediate term and it is popular among lower-income groups. However, it is not sustainable and may not have that much of an impact when inflation continues as it will. Rather, a more comprehensive and sustainable economic plan needs to be put in place. Economic planning in the short and long term must meet the needs not just of the B40 but also of the entire population.

Conclusion

Notwithstanding all these immediate challenges, GE15 did put a temporary halt to years of political instability. Besides, despite the existing polarization, Malaysia is indeed a shining example that democratization through election is possible even in a competitive authoritarian regime. The questions now are two-fold. Could Anwar and his team sustain this glimmer of hope? Can the new regime juggle between serving the interest of the public and dealing with the internal battles within its unity government that comprise former political opponents?

Introduction

Political trust, the extent to which citizens trust political actors or institutions to act in their interests, is imperative to the overall health of a political system. A high degree of political trust among voters would encourage them to participate in political and civic activities that are supportive of democracy. This, in turn, would foster accountability among politicians and the pursuit of the collective good of society.

Conversely, a low level of political trust could breed cynicism and political disengagement among the electorates. Left unchecked, a low level of political trust could lead to a downward spiral of democratic decline.

Over the past two years, electorates in Malaysia are showing a low level of political trust for politicians and government. A study conducted by Ipsos Malaysia in 2021 revealed that Malaysians have the lowest trust levels for politicians compared to professionals such as teachers, doctors, and scientists.  Separately, in a survey conducted by Merdeka Centre in 2021 among Malaysian youths, it was found that 66 percent of young people think that politicians and public officials “don’t care what people think”. In the same study, more than two-thirds of the respondents expressed no interest to participate in politics. The 2022 Edelman Trust Barometer also found that many Malaysians expressed eroding trust in the government.  Collectively, the results of these surveys show a worrying trend of dwindling political trust.  

These survey results should not come as a surprise considering the political instability in the country over the past two years. In 2020, the political coup popularly known as the Sheraton Move saw the collapse of the Pakatan Harapan (PH) government when Partai Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (Bersatu) – a component party of PH – and several members of Parliaments from Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) withdrew their support from the coalition. The PH government was subsequently replaced by the Perikatan Nasional (PN) coalition, comprising the former ruling coalition Barisan Nasional (BN) and the defectors from PH. After a short stint of 17 months, the PN government collapsed in a similar fashion when 15 lawmakers within its coalition withdrew their support.

The power jostling characterized by shifting alliances and loose coalitions has caused political instability in the country. What was worse is that all these unfolded amid the Covid-19 pandemic where the average voters were struggling with the double whammy of economic and health concerns. Such public display of power gives the impression that politicians are only interested in their own interests instead of public interests. Inevitably, it contributed to the growing political distrust of the general public.

At present, the Malaysian government is led by Prime Minister Ismail Sabri from United Malays National Organisation (UMNO). While some semblance of political stability is maintained, partly because of the memorandum signed between the ruling party and the opposition, the Prime Minister is pressured to call for an early general election. While it is uncertain when the election would be called, what is sure is that it has to be called by September 2023.

Challenges and Consequences of Dwindling Political Trust

Given the low level of political trust among the electorates, the immediate challenge for all political parties is a high voter turnout rate in the upcoming general election. After witnessing the changes of government that are void of an electoral mandate, it is perhaps safe to argue that many Malaysians are not incentivized to participate in the electoral process. They may feel that their participation would not make any meaningful impact and choose to abstain from voting. If there is a sizable population of voters who choose not to vote, electoral results stemming from a low voter turnout rate would not truly reflect the aspiration of the larger electorate.

In the mid-term, a low level of political trust in Malaysia would also have implications beyond electoral participation. The electorates may withdraw themselves from any kind of political or civic participation as they may feel that their participation may not have any meaningful impact. Consequently, it would lessen public pressure on the government.  In tandem, elected politicians may be tempted to dictate agendas that may not necessarily serve the common good of the public but only the interests of particular groups.

In the long run, it will widen the existing inequalities and deepen the political distrust of the average voters. Furthermore, it would certainly lead to worsening governmental performance such as poorer public services. By contrast, involved citizens would demand transparency and accountability from officeholders, and strong public pressure will force elected politicians to take public interests seriously.

Growing distrusts of politicians and governments could also lead to a lack of interest and engagement in political discourse, which would in turn weaken healthy public debates. Without diverse views and inputs, it will be challenging for people to form objective opinions on politicians and governments. As it is, political narratives in Malaysia tend to pivot around race and religion and are being framed as a zero-sum game.

Yet in reality, policy debates are much more complicated. More often than not, compromises are necessary for the collective good of national interests. But this is not something that is commonly communicated to the public –it is rare for Malaysian politicians to ask their supporters to compromise. Instead, some if not all, would most likely prey on voters’ insecurities to woo their support. Alternatively, they may make accusations against their opponents and resort to mud-slinging. An absence of healthy public debates or political discourse that is driven by factual and rational arguments would harden partisanship and entrench polarisation.

In gist, a low level of political trust could facilitate political disengagement from the electorates. It would widen the gaps between political elites and the average voters. In the long run, political distrust would also undermine the democracy of the country. 

Measures to Mitigate the Dwindling Political Trust

Moving forward, there is a need to arrest this dwindling political trust among the electorates because the collective participation of the people is necessary for the democratic health of Malaysia.

To arrest this dwindling sense of political trust would require efforts from a spectrum of actors and institutions. First, politicians from across the spectrum should inspire voters to come out to vote. Rather than preying on voters’ insecurities or mobilizing on identity politics, they should set the agenda for healthy policy debates. For example, they should refrain from unethical forms of campaigning such as propagating false information to manoeuvre public sentiments. Instead, taking the lead in engaging in rational policy debates would help to evoke political interests among the electorates.

It would of course be naïve to imagine that all politicians will do so. In general, politicians in Malaysia are expected to toe the party line. If they don’t, they may lose the opportunity to rise up in the ranks within their party. This means that political expediency will most likely overshadow principles. Yet, generational differences may provide some hope. The younger generation of political leaders who are socialized differently than their predecessors are less likely to be dogmatic with their views and remain subservient at all times. They are also more informed and even equipped to engage in policy debates. Hence, the younger cohort of politicians has much potential to revamp the narrative of the political discourse. Done right, it may even seal their status as a trustable politician, regardless of which party they are affiliated with. Second, there is a need to increase political literacy, especially among the youths. A recent study by University Tunku Abdul Rahman found that Malaysian youths mainly acquired political knowledge from family and friends. This is not ideal as youths would only remain in an echo chamber that is already somewhat biased. Therefore, political education should be introduced in schools and all higher education institutions. For example, theories and concepts of politics, variances of political governments, strengths, and limitations of democracy should be incorporated into the curriculum. Such effort is even more urgent now as it is expected that 1.2 million youths between the age of 18 to 20 are eligible to vote in the next general election.

Third, institutions such as the electoral commission, civil society organizations such as electoral watchdog and even political parties should exhort the idea that voters should think of electoral participation as fulfilling their role as citizens.  

Conclusion

As intangible as it may seem, growing political distrust should not be taken lightly because it could contribute to the democratic decline in Malaysia. We need to realize that at the end of the day, the greatest danger to democracy in Malaysia is not a political coup or even unprincipled politicians, but the hopelessness of the millions who no longer believe their political participation matters.