Is Anwar’s anti-graft drive worth the political instability?

The so-called ‘Dubai Move’ will be difficult to implement as the palace is unlikely to intervene.

Murray Hunter - 04 Jan 2024, 7:00am

When former finance minister Daim Zainuddin failed to explain the sources of his wealth, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) seized control of the iconic Ilham Tower in Kuala Lumpur, owned by the Daim family.

With new names being leaked out as persons of interest to the MACC, many senior political and businesspeople are shuddering with fear that they might be next.

The seizure of Ilham Tower originated from an investigation of transactions dating back to 1997 based on the “Pandora Papers” that show a RM2.3 billion trail of concealed financial transactions through a web of offshore accounts.

The action was taken under the MACC Act 2009, which brings into question the legality of the seizure, as the transactions predate the legislation being used.

Daim has claimed the action against him is plain political persecution, bringing much conjecture around Kuala Lumpur as to whether the Ilham Tower seizure is genuinely part of Anwar’s anti-corruption crusade, part of a pre-emptive move to shore up his government, or motivated by revenge and retribution.

The move could easily backfire, isolating Anwar even further from the Malay electorate he desperately wants to win over.

This all comes on the back of charges brought against former prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin, after the High Court found four abuse of power charges defective and dismissed them.

In addition, the pursuit of Daim contrasts with the discharge not amounting to an acquittal from 47 breaches of trust and money laundering charges secured by Umno president and deputy prime minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi last year. This supports allegations of selective prosecution made by the opposition.

Coordinated defence of the Madani government?

There appears to be a coordinated attack on the opposition. Anwar’s strategists may believe that attacking the opposition is the best defence of the government.

The defection of five opposition MPs, who have pledged support for Anwar while remaining members of Bersatu, not only shores up Anwar’s parliamentary numbers, but makes Muhyiddin’s leadership look like it is crumbling, with Bersatu’s representation in Parliament whittled down from 31 to 26 seats.

Actions always lead to reactions

The happenings of the last week have led to the possibility that pursuing those who are still powerful with lawfare on decades-old issues will lead to these powerful people plotting their own attacks on the Anwar government to bring back a period of political instability.

This is where the alleged meetings among a number of politicians across various parties has led to speculation of some sort of attempt to bring down the Anwar government in favour of a new government comprising PAS, Bersatu and Umno, with the support of the East Malaysian parties.

J-Kom reaction makes govt look hypocritical

The reaction from community communications department deputy director-general Ismail Yusop has further played up the issue. Ismail said such discussions were acts of betrayal, a malicious political conspiracy, and an act of treason, adding that Anwar should act decisively. Such comments are enough to create more damage.

Ismail’s comments imply that such a move is backed by powerful political figures who are providing financial support to induce MPs to switch their allegiances in what has been dubbed the “Dubai Move”.

What could happen next?

Any such move is unlikely to resemble the “Sheraton Move” that dislodged Pakatan Harapan from office in February 2020.

Carrying a batch of statutory declaration (SDs) to the Istana will not work this time around. There is no Covid-19 pandemic and no emergency, so the Yang di-Pertuan Agong would likely allow Parliament to deal with the issue, particularly with less than one month left on his tenure as king.

Based on past moves to oust previous administrations, any move to bring down a government on the floor of the Dewan Rakyat would require politicians to come out of the dark and directly into the light to proactively advocate a “no-confidence” motion.

Most individual MPs would shy away from this, as they would feel very uncomfortable playing direct and public roles. It would be much easier for MPs to sign their SDs and let others deal with the matter.

Directly calling for a motion of no confidence in the prime minister would be risky. That is why it has never been done before. Most moves against a prime minister have always been via the king’s office, using SDs as proof of a majority.

This indicates that the “Dubai Move” would be difficult to implement, as it would most probably cause ripples within Umno. Also, Bersatu would have to play a very proactive role to topple Anwar, which it would not be prepared to do.

If the objective of the so-called “Dubai Move” was to give the appearance of political instability, then it has achieved that goal. If it was intended as the start of Anwar’s downfall, then its proponents better have a very good strategy in place.

However, if there was a vote of no confidence, and Anwar lost the vote, he would either have to resign as prime minister and/or advise the king to call a general election.

If no other MP could show he or she could command the confidence of at least 112 MPs in the Dewan Rakyat, there would be little choice but to have a general election.

Go for an early election?

The only way Anwar can be deposed is most probably through an early general election.

With the unpopularity of the Anwar government, this is something the Pakatan Harapan (PH) components in the coalition would fear most. In addition, Umno would most likely be desecrated, so will resist any calls for a general election.

The likely outcome, if a general election is called, would be a replay of the 2022 election, except that Umno and PH would have much fewer seats. This would place the East Malaysian parties in the “kingmaker” role.

Any general election would most probably lead to a Malay-centric coalition, with Sabah and Sarawakian support. Sarawak would head towards “de facto independence” or autonomy by taking control of more infrastructural assets and power at the state level. The Federation of Malaysia would look more like a marriage of convenience than a united nation.

The solution to potential political instability might not rest with party politics, parliament, or the people. Anwar’s anti-corruption crusade may have to make compromises for the sake of a stable government. Otherwise, we could see the fall of his government.