Malaysiakini : However, the Bar Council’s reliance on the judicial view that Islam’s constitutional role was primarily ceremonial does not fully capture the legal position.

The constitutional text, read alongside subsequent judicial decisions, points to a more complex and nuanced conclusion.

Definitions matter

An “Islamic state” has no universally accepted legal definition. If it simply means a Muslim-majority country in which Islam is constitutionally recognised, Islamic institutions receive public funding and Islamic law is given legal effect in specified areas, Malaysia qualifies in that broad sense.

However, if it means a state in which syariah is the supreme law, all legislation derives its validity from it and any inconsistent law is void, Malaysia does not.

“Secular state” is equally ambiguous. If secularism requires an impermeable wall between religion and government, Malaysia is not secular: the Federal Constitution expressly recognises Islam and provides extensive machinery for its administration.

If it means that the legal authority of public institutions ultimately derives from and is limited by a written Constitution, rather than directly from religious law, and is exercised through constitutional and representative institutions subject to review by the civil courts, Malaysia has a fundamentally civil-constitutional structure.

The answer therefore depends on the definition being used.

What constitutional text says

Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution states: “Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation.”

Islam’s position is therefore constitutionally recognised and institutionally significant; it does not rest merely on the country’s Muslim-majority population.

Other provisions give that declaration institutional effect. The Malay rulers are heads of Islam in their respective states, while the Yang di-Pertuan Agong holds that position in the federal territories and the four states without a ruler - Malacca, Penang, Sabah and Sarawak.

Article 12(2) permits public funding for Islamic institutions and instruction. Article 160 links the constitutional definition of “Malay” to the profession of Islam.

Religious freedom is also constitutionally protected, though not without limits. Article 11(1) gives every person the right to profess and practise a religion and, subject to Article 11(4), to propagate it.

Article 11(4) permits state law, and federal law in the federal territories, to control or restrict the propagation of religious doctrines or beliefs among Muslims. Article 11(5) provides that Article 11 does not authorise acts contrary to general laws concerning public order, public health and morality.

Article 74(2), read with Item 1 of the State List in the Ninth Schedule, empowers state legislatures to make laws concerning Islamic personal and family law, mosques, zakat, wakaf, and the creation and punishment of offences by persons professing Islam against the precepts of Islam, except in relation to matters within the Federal List.

This legislative field also encompasses the Constitution, organisation and procedure of syariah courts, whose jurisdiction is confined to persons professing Islam and matters falling within Item 1.

Their jurisdiction over offences extends only so far as federal law permits. These constitutional arrangements make clear that Malaysia is not a polity in which religion is institutionally excluded from public life or Islam confined to private devotion.

Yet, Article 3 does not stand alone. Article 3(4) expressly says that nothing in Article 3 derogates from any other constitutional provision.

Article 4(1) declares the Federal Constitution to be the supreme law of the Federation. Any post-Merdeka law inconsistent with it is void to the extent of the inconsistency. Islam’s protected position must therefore be read together with fundamental liberties, federalism, representative government and judicial review.

Article 121(1A), inserted in 1988, provides that the civil courts “shall have no jurisdiction in respect of any matter within the jurisdiction of the syariah courts”.

It is sometimes cited as proof that Malaysia has two co-equal and autonomous judicial systems. That interpretation overstates its effect.

The provision operates only where a syariah court lawfully possesses jurisdiction; it does not create or enlarge syariah jurisdiction, expand the State List or oust the superior civil courts’ power to determine constitutional and statutory legality.

Syariah court’s jurisdiction must be conferred by valid legislation, be limited to persons professing Islam and matters within Item 1 of the State List and, in respect of offences, remain within the limits conferred by federal law.

Founding fathers’ constitutional vision

The constitutional history reinforces this reading. Paragraph 169 of the 1957 Reid Commission Report recorded the Alliance’s proposal that Islam be the religion of Malaya, together with the assurance that this would not affect the civil rights of non-Muslims or imply that the state was not secular.

The commission’s majority did not recommend inserting such a provision. Judge Abdul Hamid from the Pakistan High Court supported it in his sole note of dissent, and the present clause was subsequently adopted through the working party process.

The 1957 government White Paper, Federation of Malaya Constitutional Proposals, was explicit that inserting the declaration on Islam would not alter the Federation’s existing position as a secular state.

On May 1, 1958, Tunku Abdul Rahman similarly told the Federal Legislative Council that Malaya was not an Islamic state in the generally understood sense, even though Islam had been made the state’s official religion.

Formation of Malaysia

The formation of Malaysia added another layer. The 1962 Cobbold Commission recorded serious concerns in North Borneo (Sabah) and Sarawak.

Its Malayan members agreed that Islam should be the national religion of the Federation, while concluding that religious freedom would not be jeopardised and that the Federation would, in effect, remain secular.

These historical sources do not override the Constitution’s enacted text.

They do, however, show that Article 3 was not intended to establish a theocracy or make every law subject to a religious validity test.

In this context, “secular” did not mean hostility towards religion or the banishment of Islam from public life.

It described a civil constitutional polity in which public institutions derived their powers from the Constitution, non-Muslims retained religious freedom, and ordinary law did not become invalid merely because it failed to conform to a religious rule.

What courts have decided

The starting point remains Che Omar Che Soh v Public Prosecutor (1988) 2 MLJ 55. The Supreme Court rejected the argument that a federal criminal law became unconstitutional merely because it was inconsistent with Islamic law.

Then-lord president Salleh Abas held that, in the context of Article 3, “Islam” meant acts relating to rituals and ceremonies, and concluded that the law then operating was “secular law”.

Che Omar should nevertheless not be read as reducing Islam to pageantry in every constitutional respect.

In Nik Elin Zurina Nik Abdul Rashid & Anor v Kerajaan Negeri Kelantan (2024) 2 MLJ 150 (Nik Elin), the Federal Court explained that Malaysia’s general legal system “leans more towards secularity without being purely secular”, because the Constitution also permits the limited enactment and application of Islamic law.

---

READ MORE: Apex court strikes down 16 Kelantan syariah criminal provisions

---

The controlling point in Che Omar remains that Article 3 does not make conformity with syariah the general test of validity for every Malaysian law.

Indira Gandhi’s case

Later Federal Court decisions have reaffirmed the constitutional hierarchy. In Indira Gandhi Mutho v Pengarah Jabatan Agama Islam Perak & Ors and other appeals (2018) 1 MLJ 545, the court held that Article 121(1A) does not remove the civil courts’ power of judicial review.

Civil and syariah courts operate within their respective constitutional spheres, and syariah courts cannot acquire jurisdiction beyond what valid state law confers within constitutional and federal statutory limits.

In Iki Putra Mubarrak v Kerajaan Negeri Selangor & Anor (2021) 2 MLJ 323, the Federal Court invalidated a Selangor syariah offence because its substance fell within federal criminal law.

In Nik Elin’s case, an 8-1 majority declared 17 Kelantan provisions - 16 complete sections and paragraph 37(1)(b) - invalid because, in pith and substance, they fell within Parliament’s legislative power over criminal law.

The court emphasised that the case concerned legislative competence, not the constitutional position of Islam or the authority of the syariah courts within their lawful sphere.

On June 19, 2025, a 3-1 majority in SIS Forum (Malaysia) & Anor v Jawatankuasa Fatwa Negeri Selangor & Ors (2025) 4 MLJ 625 followed the court’s earlier decision in SIS Forum (Malaysia) v Kerajaan Negeri Selangor; Majlis Agama Islam Selangor (Intervener) (2022) 2 MLJ 356.

---

READ MORE: SIS fatwa: Apex court rules only people, not companies can be declared deviant

---

The majority held that paragraph 1 of the fatwa was valid only insofar as it applied to natural persons, because SIS Forum, as a corporation, was incapable of professing the religion of Islam.

It invalidated paragraphs 2 and 3, which mandated the confiscation of publications and directed the MCMC to block social-media content, because those matters lay beyond Selangor’s legislative competence. Paragraph 4 remained valid. The court expressly declined to rule on the theological merits of the fatwa’s condemnation.

Judicial secularisation?

Critics sometimes characterise such rulings as judicial secularisation. That confuses the subject of a law with the source of legislative power.

A measure does not become constitutionally valid merely because it is made in the name of Islam, just as a federal law does not become valid merely because Parliament enacted it.

Both Parliament and the state legislatures derive their powers from the Constitution. If the present division of powers is considered inadequate, the remedy lies in constitutional amendment through the prescribed democratic process - not in criticising judges for applying the existing constitutional allocation of powers.

Hybrid constitutional system with clear legal apex

In Iseas Perspective 2025/27, “Legal Pluralism in Malaysia: Navigating the Civil and Shariah Systems”, constitutional scholar Shad Saleem Faruqi referred to “Malaysia’s hybrid, partly secular, partly religious constitutional system”.

That description is persuasive because it acknowledges both sides of the settlement: Islam has an exalted constitutional and institutional position, while the overall system rests on constitutional supremacy, parliamentary law-making, federalism and judicial review by the superior civil courts.

Malaysia is not secular in the strict separationist sense, but neither is it a theocratic Islamic state.

Political declarations cannot change that architecture. A prime minister may call Malaysia an Islamic state, a secular state or something in between, but such a statement neither amends the Constitution nor binds the courts. Constitutional identity cannot be created by proclamation.

The most defensible formulation is this: Malaysia is a constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy in which Islam is the religion of the Federation and enjoys a special institutional position, while Islamic law enacted by the states - and by Parliament for the federal territories - operates within constitutionally defined fields, and the Federal Constitution remains supreme.

So, is Malaysia an Islamic state? Malaysia is unquestionably a Muslim-majority country in which Islam enjoys special constitutional and institutional recognition.

But in the constitutional sense of a state governed by the supremacy of syariah, the answer is no. The Federal Constitution is the supreme law, and any legal answer must ultimately be anchored in it.

After nearly seven decades of independence, Malaysians should be celebrating our remarkable diversity, not allowing this recurring dispute to drive us further apart.

Malaysia belongs to all its citizens. Our future depends not on endlessly contesting one another’s place in the nation, but on respecting the Constitution, embracing our shared citizenship and recognising our diversity as a source of strength.

That is the Malaysia we should strive to build - and the nation we should be proud to leave to future generations.

Malaysiakini : Substantially reworked

As Ranjit said in the introduction to the book, each chapter has been “substantially reworked: expanded with richer detail, sharpened analysis, and supported by specific citations from authoritative sources.”

The impetus for the book, in Ranjit’s words: “Since 1996, Malaysia’s secondary school history textbooks have presented a markedly one-sided narrative - overwhelmingly framed through Malay and Islamic perspectives - resulting in distortions, half-truths and the omission of important facts vital to nation-building.

“In effect, many young Malaysians are likely learning a government-sanctioned version of history framed largely through the perspective of one ethnic group and perceived by critics as aligned with the concept of ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ (Malay supremacy).”

He further goes on to outline what’s missing in the textbooks that merit attention.

First, the pivotal roles of non-Malays in tin-mining, rubber cultivation, commercial agriculture and infrastructure development are minimised or erased.

Second, civilisational coverage emphasises Islam, minimising Indian and Chinese civilisation and sidelining the “profound Hindu-Buddhist influence on Malay language, literature, governance, and culture”.

Third, in terms of accuracy and attributions, there are occasional errors in dates, attributions, and the portrayal of historical figures such as Parameswara, which undermines credibility.

Finally, he takes issue with the poor representation of the position of the original inhabitants, the Orang Asli, who “are virtually invisible in the narratives of the Form 1 to 5 textbooks”.

Common distortions

Chapter 1 kicks it off with a discussion of common distortions in Malaysia’s textbooks which centre around diminishing the contributions of non-Malays. This is expanded further in the next seven chapters.

Examples include diminishing the role of Yap Ah Loy’s contributions in founding Kuala Lumpur.

While a 1979 edition of the Form Four history textbook devoted three pages to this, it was reduced to a mention subsequently. “That such a rich account has been reduced to a perfunctory mention in the latest textbooks is not merely an oversight; it is an act of historical diminishment."

Another example is the minimisation of the treatment of Orang Asli, with the current series of textbooks providing only minimal coverage. They are no longer explicitly acknowledged as the first people.

Ranjit said the Form Four textbook (2019, page 225) explicitly states that the Malays are the “rakyat asal Tanah Melayu” (the original people of Malaya).

Such omissions matter, and risk obscuring the primacy of the Orang Asli and the peninsula’s deep indigenous heritage, he added.

Parameswara converted?

One more example is the diminishment of Indian influences on Malay language, culture and practices and the myth perpetuated in the 2017 Form 2 history book (page 82) that Parameswara (Malacca’s founding prince) converted to Islam in 1414 and adopted the name Megat Iskandar Shah.

Ranjit cites Ming Dynasty sources quoted in books to say that Parameswara and Megat Iskandar Shah were father and son. “This primary evidence not only debunks the textbook’s claim but also exposes a troubling disregard for well-established historical facts,” he added.

There are numerous other examples of misrepresentations in this chapter and the seven chapters that follow, including the following:

• Quoting one author to say that the real home of the Malays is Sumatera, not the Malay Peninsula. Most Malays migrated to the Malay Peninsula in historical times and owe their origin to Sumatera.

• In 1931, less than 60 percent of those recorded as “Malay” had resided in Malaya for more than 40 years.

• In 2013, Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, then-home minister, declared that “over half of Malaysian ministers are of Indonesian descent”.

• Indian presence in Malaya dates back 2,000 years, while Chinese presence is evident from the 15th century

There are many such snippets of information interspersed within the first eight chapters. Most of the rest of the chapters cover the minority communities - even those within the Chinese, Indian and Malay communities, those in Sabah and Sarawak and the indigenous communities.

They are all interesting, well-researched and give glimpses into their lives and history, bringing back echoes of a past era which is in dire danger of being forgotten altogether in the future.

Chapters 30 to 34 are devoted to five leaders - Social Front activist Karam Singh Veriah (not many youngsters will remember him), DAP leader Karpal Singh, PAS leader Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, former deputy prime minister Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman and former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Only Mahathir is still around. There are interesting insights about each of them.

Setting history straight

The final Chapter 35 is a brief account of May 13, 1969, its origins and participants, and a discussion of the numerous theories surrounding its occurrence, the only large-scale outbreak of racial riots in the country.

It’s an excellent, balanced and informative starting point for those interested in knowing more about this sad, momentous episode which reshaped Malaysian history in startling ways.

It’s perhaps the most significant event in post-Merdeka Malaysia, changing its character forever.

This is a badly needed book for Malaysia simply because it helps to set the historical record straight and suggests ways and means that this can be achieved.

One hopes that our leaders pay attention. Distorting history is no way to build a nation.

The only major complaint I have is the price point of the book at RM100. But it is a hard-cover edition.

My hope is that it is produced in a soft-cover edition at perhaps half the price and is available in an e-book version too.

Along with this, a Malay edition will also improve accessibility and help foster what I hope is an informed debate about the real history of the country without the disturbance of politics, racial, religious and regional differences.

A nation must be built on truth. Ranjit has made an important contribution here, an attempt to help put history right by setting it straight.

Malaysiakini : ‘Heritage’ players fiasco

However, the search for the truth about the footballers who caused the country’s name to be dragged through the drain to the sewers has not ended…yet.

The damning indictment by the Appeals Committee of the International Federation of Association Football (Fifa) still reverberates around the sporting world:

“Using fraudulent documentation to allow a player to compete constitutes, pure and simple, a form of cheating, which cannot in any way be condoned.”

Doesn’t anyone care if we are called cheats?

READ MORE: ‘Heritage’ players probe hits roadblock, says committee

Ten months on, the scandal still smoulders - truth lies in plain sight, yet it remains buried beneath silence and deceit, the daily currency of power.”

But in seeking the truth, the starting point has to be Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, whose actions may hold the key to how and why we have been treated with contempt and dislike, and made a laughing stock.

The morning after Malaysia beat Vietnam 4-0 in the Asia Cup qualifier in June last year, the Football Association of Malaysia (FAM) thanked him not only for the financial support through special allocations for Harimau Malaya, but also acknowledged that the government facilitated the documentation process for new heritage players, enabling them to feature in the match.

So, it was a tacit and implicit admission that the government “organised” the citizenship to enable the seven foreigners to play.

Yes, the prime minister and his government accepted the plaudits for their efforts, especially from the football fans.

PM’s silence is deafening

However, sad to say, despite making headlines shouting himself hoarse about honesty and integrity, his silence on this issue is deafening.

Will he lead the voice for greater openness - the truth - or maintain his golden silence for political expediency or otherwise?

Next, we have to ask about the parliamentary statement by Home Minister Saifuddin Nasution Ismail, who claimed Article 20(1)(e) of the Federal Constitution provides discretionary power to a home minister when considering a citizenship application from a foreigner, particularly in the fulfilment of the minimum residency requirements.

As human rights lawyer Eric Paulsen pointed out: “… the residence requirement is clear and unambiguous, with no room or provision for Saifuddin to grant an exemption or improvise.”

Next question: Who submitted the application? Was it an individual or the FAM? Can a sports body apply on behalf of the players?

EAIC points out irregularities

But the EAIC noted: “The minister had exercised his powers and discretion in granting special approval to the players, taking into account their contribution to football and the potential to bring glory to the country.

“However, the task force found that consideration of the requirements for the special approvals had been carried out within an extremely short period and in an irregular manner.”

The EAIC, among other issues, identified irregularities in the issuance of entry permits involving the interview process and security screening conducted by the Immigration Department on the players.

Yet, another agency under the Home Ministry - the National Registration Department (NRD) - is the cog in the wheel that processed falsified documents, declared them to be true, and issued MyKads which the players used to submit applications for citizenship, and then passports.

In a note in the form of a statutory declaration to Fifa, New Straits Times reported NRD director-general Badrul Hisham Alias saying: “NRD never received the original birth certificate, and instead issued a new birth certificate based on secondary information and foreign documents from Argentina, Brazil, and Spain.”

According to the NRD, all required documents were submitted by the applicants and cross-checked with records from Argentina, Brazil, and Spain.

While original handwritten birth records could not be retrieved from historical archives, official copies were issued based on the evidence. The process also confirmed residency in Malaysia, sufficient knowledge of Malay, and good conduct.

How did they pass the language test without being able to speak Malay? Who conducted the test? Shouldn’t the NRD be culpable?

So, isn’t there a contradiction between the EAIC findings and Badrul’s claims?

But NRD’s deceit had already been called out by Fifa which held that the seven footballers granted Malaysian citizenship don't have any grandparents born in the country as claimed.

In the grounds of its ruling to sanction FAM and the seven players, Fifa revealed it had acquired the original birth documents of the players’ “Malaysian-born” grandparents, which contradicted the allegedly doctored documents submitted by the Malaysian side.

NRD and the verification players were caught with their pants down.

What about FAM?

Finally, we have to address the perpetrators of this drama - the FAM.

This has been asked before and it is worth repeating: Who was responsible for hiring the agents to recruit the foreigners? Was it the FAM president, his deputy, the secretary general, or the entire council?

When the Fifa Disciplinary Committee pulled up FAM, the immediate response was that it was a technical error in the administrative staff's document submission process.

FAM continued to state it did not do anything wrong, but added yet another ridiculous reason - it is legally barred from disclosing details about the seven foreign players, citing Malaysian laws governing official secrets and passport procedures.

FAM stressed that Fifa’s claim that the players “obtained or were aware of forged documents” was unfounded, as no solid evidence had been presented to support the allegation.

After Fifa’s Appeals Committee rejected the appeal, I wrote: “The global governing body’s core finding still stands, unexpunged and echoing in the football pitches of international sports and hallowed halls of governments:

“Using fraudulent documentation to allow a player to compete constitutes, pure and simple, a form of cheating, which cannot in any way be condoned.

“This was more than a ruling; the fact stated subjected Malaysian football and its systems of governance to global odium, ridicule, and contempt.”

Then there was FAM acting president Yusoff Mahadi declaring that it will take its challenge to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), describing it as “a major war” to defend Malaysia’s footballing reputation, adding that all resources would be used.

I asked: “But what kind of war is this, when the generals march empty-handed? The birth certificates of the players’ grandparents presented by FAM are forged. CAS will have access to the originals, and FAM will be left with egg - not honour - on their faces”

You can’t get different results by relying on the same set of documents. Naturally, FAM retreated with its tail between its legs.

If one reads the various reports from Fifa, FAM, its officials, the government and the EAIC, he or she can come to an understanding of what transpired.

So, how do we get the truth?

Anwar must act

The process must start from the very top. For a man who promised openness, Anwar has been restricted on this fiasco, preferring to exercise his oratory skills, mesmerising selected audiences - but not a word about the deceit carried out by his government officials.

He must lead the way for Saifuddin, Badrul, FAM officials and other officials to start telling the truth.

If he had not sanctioned such an act, why did FAM thank his government for “facilitating the documentation process for new heritage players”, which is a misnomer because they had no heritage - they were journeymen (read: sports mercenaries) who got paid hundreds of thousands of ringgit by our taxpayers' money to just change their nationality to represent Malaysia - albeit illegally.

But will he do it and put this behind in our country’s history? Or, because it serves no political purpose, will it be ignored and fade into oblivion?

The scandal over Malaysia’s naturalised footballers is more than a sporting misstep - it is a damning reflection of how silence, excuses, and irregularities corrode governance.

The EAIC flagged irregular approvals, the NRD knowingly processed falsified documents, and the FAM deflected blame with evasions.

Yet the loudest silence comes from the prime minister, whose government facilitated the process but has offered no accountability.

If Malaysia is serious about integrity, its leaders must confront the truth rather than bury it under political expediency. Otherwise, this episode will remain as a permanent stain on the nation’s credibility.

Malaysiakini : Issues abound.  

The RCI found that Tabung Haji should have reported a RM1.4 billion loss in 2017, rather than the RM3.4 billion profit it reported.

It also found that political considerations influenced decisions on hibah, haj payments, and financial assistance.

Losses and impairments were not properly recognised, while hibah was paid despite the institution’s deteriorating financial position.

This wasn’t a one-year accident. The financial crisis stretched back to 2014, and Bank Negara reportedly issued five warnings between 2014 and 2016.

So who received those warnings? More importantly, why wasn’t the problem stopped?

Was Tabung Haji being run as a financially disciplined institution, or was it being asked to serve political and social objectives that its finances could not sustain?

How could an institution this important be allowed to decay across political administrations?

Billions in losses

The RCI identified 14 problematic investments which ultimately produced almost RM13 billion in losses.

It recommended forensic audits into how those investments were made and said those involved in the decisions should be held responsible for the losses.

That raises some very simple questions: Who approved them? Who carried out the due diligence? Who raised concerns? Who ignored them? And who signed off?

There is no need to accuse anyone of stealing money to demand answers.

Tabung Haji paid about RM367.7 million in bonuses between 2010 and 2017. The RCI found the payments excessively high and identified unauthorised bonuses at its subsidiary as well.

This is where the story becomes more than financial.

Tabung Haji exists to help Malaysian Muslims save to fulfil a fundamental religious obligation - to perform the haj, one of the five pillars of Islam.

So what does it say about an institution entrusted with that sacred purpose when its financial position is deteriorating while substantial bonuses are being paid?

For many depositors, this isn’t simply mismanagement. It is a betrayal of trust.

Uncomfortable questions

But no theft does not mean no wrongdoing, and it does not mean good governance either.

An institution can lose billions through reckless investments, poor decisions, inadequate controls, political interference, and failure to act on warnings.

The RCI found evidence of precisely these kinds of failures and another uncomfortable question.

The auditor-general had already raised concerns in 2018 about Tabung Haji’s impairment practices, including RM227.81 million in impairments that had not been recorded.

So, why did it take a subsequent PwC review and the RCI to expose the much larger underlying problem?

Now the MACC is investigating possible corruption, abuse of power, falsification, and money laundering.

Let the evidence determine whether criminal offences occurred, but even if nobody is ultimately convicted of stealing a single ringgit, the accountability question remains.

The RCI examined a period spanning successive governments, so this cannot simply become another political blame game.

The uncomfortable question is whether Malaysia’s political system repeatedly failed to protect Tabung Haji.

Bank Negara warned. The financial position deteriorated. Investment losses accumulated. Hibah continued. Bonuses were paid. The accounts were audited. And eventually the government had to intervene.

So who was responsible?

So who was watching the institution? Who was responsible for acting when the warning lights were flashing?

Ultimately, ordinary people don’t get to make their losses disappear by calling them “accounting differences”.

The RCI has now exposed almost RM13 billion in losses associated with 14 problematic investments, and Malaysians deserve to know who was responsible.

Who knew? Who was warned? Who authorised the investments? Who approved the hibah? Who approved the bonuses? Who signed off on the accounts? Why weren’t the losses recognised earlier?

Why weren’t Bank Negara’s warnings acted upon? Why did it take years for the public to see the RCI report? Where is the accountability?

The government must provide answers. If criminal wrongdoing is established, will those responsible face the law? If it isn’t criminal, that cannot mean everyone simply walks away from responsibility.

Tabung Haji isn’t an ordinary investment company. It was entrusted with something more valuable than money: people’s faith, savings, and hope of fulfilling one of Islam’s five pillars.

For years, Malaysians put aside their hard-earned savings believing Tabung Haji would safeguard them and help them fulfil a fundamental religious obligation.

That trust deserved better, and those entrusted with it owe Malaysians an explanation.

Imagine putting passengers into a car after dinner, knowing the driver is unfit to drive. The warning signs are there. People know about them. Yet nobody stops the journey.

When the car crashes, we don't just ask what went wrong. We ask: Who knew? Who was warned? Who allowed the driver to continue? And who was responsible for the passengers' safety?

That is the question Tabung Haji now raises. If nobody stole the money, who was responsible for losing it?

Malaysiakini :  A post by Malay news portal Malaysia Gazette got even more strident comments.

One Izack Saujana said Solehah was brave and not “lembu cucuk hidung” (a cow with a nose ring) that could be pulled here and there. He received close to 900 likes.

One Mey Aprielle commented (in uppercase letters):

SEMOGA DR TERUS KUAT MEMBONGKAR SEJARAH MELAYU DAN ISLAM

(Hope doctor keeps boldly exposing the truth of Malay Muslim history). He received 426 likes.

The overall mindset seen is: We are victims of the “conspiracy” of colonial history, and Solehah is our saviour who has revealed the truth. Never mind the fact that in our country, the Malays control all the levers of power, including in public universities.

It's like Trump smartly using racial identity to exploit an “underdog” identity against the so-called “swamp” and “fake news” of the elites.

Fact or fable?

Solehah is infamous for her fantastical claims. In November 2025, she asserted that the Malays taught Romans how to build ships. Forget the inconvenient fact that the designs of the ships were very different.

Last September, she claimed in a Gabungan Nasionalis (Nationalist Coalition) podcast that ancient Malays could fly and even taught the Chinese the art of “flying kung fu”.

Sahul Hamid Maiddin of Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris (Upsi) told the Scoop portal, “Such claims are simply not logical. History must be based on sources that can be cross-verified.

“Myths, on the other hand, are folk stories infused with imagination, romanticism and superstition.”

He added that the British encouraged legends so that people would remain lost in fantasies as “escapism”. If so, then it looks like Solehah has taken over that colonial role.

She also implied the Prophet’s wife, Siti Khadijah, may have had links to the Malays. This looked like an attempt to gain some reflected glory.

Most recently, she claimed Kedah’s leaders had Ancient Alien ancestors – just joking, she said Kedah had much iron ore because of deposits from meteors!

Boat cruises of ‘truth’

To refute Solehah, people have to dig into facts and history. But she knows many people lack the ability to look deeper or are too lazy to do so.

There's also “confirmation bias” - the human tendency to look for things that support existing beliefs while ignoring contradictory evidence.

In other words, people believe their prejudices – for example, that DAP is the “greatest threat” to the Malays, even though the huge scandals of Tabung Haji, 1MDB and Felda were linked to Umno.

Yet Solehah has clearly been proven “salah”. In a 2018 paper for an “Islamic Civilisation Journal”, she wrote that “a group of historians admitted to fabricating Ancient Greece”.

Her proof? An article from satirical news outlet The Onion!

If she doesn't know that satire is not fact, how could she become a professor? This was a classic “kangkung goreng belachan” job.

I had thought that only less educated or poorer people would be fooled by her.

But Prof James Chin, who studies Malaysian politics, pointed out that she has gone on to lead paid boat-cruise tours built around her theories.

For example, Solehah promotes herself as a speaker for the “Islamic Civilisation Voyage 3.0”, a four-day cruise from Port Klang to Phuket in early Dec 3.

During the tour, she will speak on “The Mystery of the Roman Ship Deception”.

Did IIUM review her work?

The Kedah meteors story seemed to be the last straw that broke IIUM’s back.

Shortly after, the university announced on Aug 23 that Solehah had been terminated from service on April 27.

But why delay announcing this by 118 days or four months? Why was she still allowed to go around claiming to be a “professor”? Did she have some special “protection”?

There’s a fresh fracas with Solehah claiming she was “unfairly dismissed” – if so, let IIUM pay compensation. But that’s just a sideshow distraction from more crucial issues.

Chin noted that IIUM finally took action because of the negative publicity. So, he asked, if social media had not exposed her "research", would she still be a professor?

In other words, did anyone internally check her work or peer-review it? If there were, how did she pass them?

If professors at Oxford or Cambridge had made equally bizarre claims without proper proof, how long would they have lasted?

How did Solehah remain as a “professor” long after she was caught for citing The Onion as “evidence”?

A deeper disease?

One academic in a public university told me, “To get promoted, we have to play the racial game, or we get sidelined.”

So the real problem could be: was Solehah tolerated, maybe even encouraged, by the system?

The rewriting of history to glorify one race has been going on for years in Malaysia.

Solehah was just its comical extreme.

Historian Ranjit Singh Malhi has pointed out repeatedly that school history textbooks have covered up the roles of non-Malays in building this country.

For example, the vital role of Chinese tin miners and Indian rubber tappers has been reduced to just a few sentences. The hard work of Indian workers who literally built roads, railways, bridges and ports all over Malaya has also been ignored.

Our country’s Indian (Hindu and Buddhist) past is denied, said Ranjit, even though many Malay words such as suka, duka, kapal, kedai, raja and even bahasa and bumiputera all come from Indian languages.

Even the role of the most bumi of bumiputera, the Orang Asli, has been ignored, lamented Ranjit.

Rightful ‘masters’

All this seems to point in one direction – that this country was first established, then built up by one group.

Therefore, the land belongs to them as the rightful “tuan” or “masters”.

Many embrace this rewritten “truth” as a kind of soothing ubat or drug, as seen in the many online comments supporting Solehah.

It masks the pain of ordinary Malays struggling as food delivery riders or low-level staff while the elite tuan grab most of the wealth.

Who cares about “petty concerns” such as jobs, corruption and education, when people are comforted by Solehah's fables of Maga - Malays Are Great Always.

Finance Twitter : The new Pakatan Harapan government of Mahathir had to refrain from announcing the bankruptcy of Tabung Haji for fear of spooking the depositors. It would do more harm than good. After all, if 4-million Malays were gullible enough to vote for Najib’s regime despite the exposure of 1MDB scandal, chances are they would not understand why Tabung Haji could go bust.

It was ultimately revealed in December 2018 that UMNO-led Barisan Nasional government, with endorsement from the PAS Islamist party to a certain extent, had transformed Tabung Haji into a Ponzi “get-rich-quick” scheme. As it turned out, there was a reason why  the fund could distribute “hibah (dividends)” ranging from 6.25% up to 8.25% in the period between 2013 and 2017 under the Najib administration.

At a time when fixed deposit rates were at about only 3%, the unbelievable dividend returns from Tabung Haji were so attractive that a single depositor had invested more than RM190 million in the fund. But it was just the appetizer. A report prepared by government-appointed accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) to review the financial position for 2017 unveiled more juicy stories.

Tabung Haji was actually sitting on top of up to RM10.2 billion in losses of its domestic and international equities as of October 2018. Its liabilities outstripped assets by RM9 billion. A report says – “The gap between the assets and liabilities is RM9 billion. If the RM9 billion hole is not covered, no ‘hibah (dividends)’ distribution is possible not just for 2018 but also in the coming years.”

Exactly how did the Najib government bankrupt Tabung Haji? It had lost RM5.7 billion in Felda alone. The Federal Land Development Authority (FELDA) was forced to write off huge sums of money after its subsidiary, Felda Investment Corp (FIC), went on an aggressive overseas diversification spree, including the purchase of the Merdeka Palace Hotel & Suites in Kuching for RM160 million – despite valuation of the property at only RM80 million.

Similar overpriced acquisitions occurred internationally, including the Grand Plaza Serviced Apartments in London for a whopping RM524 million in 2013 – overpaid approximately RM180 million. Worse, the recipient companies only accounted for roughly RM448 million, leaving RM76 million untraceable. Clearly, the top management of both FELDA and Tabung Haji had plundered the Malay institutions.

But that was nothing compared to the RM2.77 billion acquisition of a 37% non-controlling stake in Indonesia’s Eagle High Plantations in 2015 – overpaid a massive premium of over 95% relative to the market price of the shares. The company was owned by Indonesian billionaire Peter Sondakh, a close friend and associate of Najib Razak. Felda said Najib cheated it into investing in his tycoon friend’s Rajawali Group.

It was also not a coincidence that Tabung Haji and FELDA, not to mention MARA, PNB, LTAT, KWAP and whatnot were similarly milked and plundered at the period when the 1MDB scandal was exposed and needed bailout. Yes, to cover up the 1MDB scandal, disgraced Najib sold not only national strategic assets such as power plants, lands like Bandar Malaysia and projects like ECRL to China in exchange for kickbacks, but also actively raping the Pilgrims’ Fund.

Under Najib government, Tabung Haji also made losses of RM670 million from its attempt to rescue Ramunia Holdings Bhd and RM144 million from buying 30% of Putrajaya Perdana’s ownership (a company linked to Najib’s partner-in-crime Jho Low), not to mention RM1.1 billion losses in Felda Global Ventures (FGV) investment. The fund also did not record an impairment totalling RM227.81 million against investments in three subsidiary companies, primarily TH Heavy Engineering Bhd.

Najib and other so-called UMNO defenders of Malay, Islam and Monarch knew that like the 1MDB scandal, the Tabung Haji scandal was too complicated for the Malays and Muslims to understand. Even if they understood, which they don’t, the Malays would easily forgive fellow Malays under the pretext of Malay unity and Muslim Brotherhood.

To cover up the financial trouble of Tabung Haji, extraordinary “hibah (dividends)” were declared. Crooked Najib dared not reveal the true financial health, as his mismanagement and incompetence will be exposed. The pilgrim’s fund had been illegally distributing “hibah” to depositors since 2014, contravening the Tabung Haji Act 1995 where the fund is not allowed to declare dividends if its liabilities are more than assets.

Ahead of the 14th general election on May 9, 2018, the pilgrim’s fund even cooked its books to justify paying a 6.25% dividend, amounting to RM2.7 billion. The Pilgrims’ Fund Chairman, Abdul Azeez Abdul Rahim, had conspired with the board of directors to dip their hands into depositors’ savings to pay the dividends. And Najib knew all along about the Ponzi scheme.

The ignorant Tabung Haji depositors actually applauded Najib for the handsome “hibah”, which went up to as high as 8.25%, without realising that the dividends paid were their own money used to pay themselves. And the United Malays National Organization (UMNO) could afford to scam them successfully because out of 9.3 million depositors, only 30,000 would use their money in Tabung Haji to perform Hajj every year.

The depositor who had invested more than RM190 million in the fund would have made a cool RM15.675 million for doing nothing in the year it yielded 8.35% of dividend. But a Ponzi scheme is unsustainable. The Tabung Haji’s Recovery and Restructuring Working Plan reveal­ed the stunning high concentration of depositors to a small segment where 1.3%, or a mere 117,000 of them (depositors), contributed to 50% of its deposits. 

This means if the small number of powerful and rich depositors pull out, the scheme would definitely collapse. Overstated profits, understated value of assets, unbalanced profile of depositors and questionable transactions were all uncovered in the review of the financial position of Lembaga Tabung Haji (board of pilgrim’s fund) back in 2018. 

In April 2019, Tabung Haji announced a “hibah (dividend)” of 1.25% – the lowest in the history – for the financial year 2018. Even at 1.25%, the payout was at a staggering RM913 million to its 9.3 million depositors. Mahathir government also announced that it will allocate RM500 million in 2020 for the Pilgrims’ Fund and RM1.73 billion every year until all of its “sukuk” (Shariah-compliant bonds) were redeemed.

How could Tabung Haji suddenly become as healthy as a horse overnight? Two words – Bail Out!! As of January 1, 2019, the Islamic Pilgrimage Fund Lembaga Tabung Haji was placed under Bank Negara (Central Bank). A Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) was created to nurse and rehabilitate the insolvent fund. In short, taxpayers’ money to the tune of RM20 billion was used in the bail out exercise.

Even as then-Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng cracked his head squeezing every Ringgit to bail out the Tabung Haji, crooks from UMNO and PAS spread baseless and fake news that the hajj pilgrims fund board was under the control of Chinese-based DAP. The depositors should be grateful that the fund is guaranteed by the government, unlike entities like Malaysia Airlines.

Worse, in what appears to be an insult to the good name of Islam, the previous government of UMNO Malay nationalist party which was heavily supported by the PAS Islamist party had cooked the Tabung Haji accounting books by selling its shares in Bank Islam Malaysia Berhad to show a profit and then repurchasing the same shares – a breach of listing of stock exchange and cheating of the highest order.

An independent report – “Financial Position Review of TH” by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) – showed that the troubled pilgrims fund made a gain of RM553 million from the disposal of the Bank Islam shares in 2017 and subsequently bought back within four days after trade date at the same price sold through 4 brokers – UOB, Kenanga, TA Securities and Affin.

But since the so-called RM553 million gains were “fake”, former Tabung Haji chairman Abdul Azeez Abdul Rahim, also a Member of Parliament of UMNO, had conspired with the board of directors to dip their hands into depositors’ savings to pay the dividends. This created an illusion that the fund was paying an incredible high return when in fact it came from depositors’ hard-earned money.

The scam would have continued had the old UMNO regime won the 2018 general election. The Ponzi scheme was working incredibly well based on the assumption that “not every depositor” would withdraw their money in Tabung Haji. The get-rich-quick scheme would be discovered as the bubble would burst eventually due to insufficient funds – liabilities outstripped assets by RM9 billion.

Had the Mahathir-led Pakatan Harapan failed to defeat the long ruling Barisan Nasional government in 2018, the Ponzi Scheme would have continued till today. When you have 9.3 million depositors, but only 30,000 use their money in Tabung Haji to perform Hajj every year, what Najib and his band of crooks needed to do was to pay dividends using the depositors’ own money – to create an illusion that they received extraordinary “hibah”.

After you minus 30,000 from 9,300,000 depositors, the money left in Tabung Haji was pretty substantial and could still be used to pay dividends for ages using Najib’s Ponzi scheme. As a yardstick, it was discovered that the hard-earned savings fund for Muslims to perform the mandatory hajj pilgrimage should have RM64 billion in assets, but had been found to be short of RM4 billion in deposits in 2016.

Theoretically, based on the RM60 billion left in 2016, Tabung Haji could still pay its same number of depositors the same rate of dividend of 6.25% for at least another 22 years – using the depositors’ own money to pay themselves – till zero Ringgit left. After Pakatan Harapan government collapsed in 2020 after just 22 months in power, backdoor Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin set up a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) on October 8, 2021.

The RCI report dated July 19, 2022 was then presented to Yang di-Pertuan Agong (King) on August 30, 2022, when UMNO vice-president Ismail Sabir was the Prime Minister. Even then, the RCI only dared to say the crisis was due to Tabung Haji’s  “creative accounting practices” in order to enable it to declare high dividends. It also revealed how unauthorised bonuses totalling more than RM2.19 million were paid to 24 persons.

Still, the burning question is why PM Anwar Ibrahim has only decided to declassify the 211-page Lembaga Tabung Haji RCI report three days before the Negeri Sembilan state election in July 2026 – nearly four years after its completion in July 2022? It’s not rocket science that despicable Anwar was hiding the scandal to protect UMNO – till UMNO declared war with Anwar’s Pakatan Harapan in the Johor and Negeri Sembilan state elections.

Malaysiakini : PAS’ appeal runs deeper than mere religiosity. Sure, some folks gravitate to PAS because of the siren call of religion and decades of state religious indoctrination, but there is something more to it than that.

In his writings, Hadi conflates race and class, and English-language audiences only get the “race” bit.

This is why he goes on about the Chinese political and plutocratic class as a means to highlight the economic inequalities between “downtrodden” Muslims and the more economically successful non-Muslims polity.

Reshaping political landscape

Of course, Hadi fails to mention that the system is predicated on keeping the majority dependent on the state and years of policy malfeasance have created a rent-seeking class with deep political influence.

People make the mistake of thinking that Hadi is just pulling this nonsense out of his posterior. He is not. Hadi, like most theocrats in waiting, understands they need to reshape the political landscape so it will be malleable to their religious indoctrination.

And as fascists the world over have come to understand, the best way to do this is to steal ideas from class dialectics and inject religious dogma into foundational socialist principles.

Hadi’s rhetoric is drenched in the kind of class rhetoric that would make a committed socialist quiver. He cherry-picks elements of religious dogma to highlight the inequalities of capitalist systems when it comes to class but ghettoises these ideas in religious supremacy and the power of clerics.

Claiming the DAP has a “colonial agenda” resonates because the political elites at that time surrendered the sovereignty of the country, thereby creating a majority underclass. When young Malays say the political system has let them down, they mean the political elites have let them down.

What Hadi is trying to do

So if you are a disenfranchised Muslim in capitalistic Western-influenced Malaysia, you would take away two points from Hadi. The first is, by virtue of your class, you are being shafted by the system even though your religion and Constitution dictate otherwise.

And the second point, in an Islamic state, the keepers of the faith will protect you from the inequalities of the system because Islam as a system of governance supposedly treats everyone equally.

When Hadi goes after other Muslim political operatives calling them traitors, what he is actually doing is claiming that they are class traitors enamoured by the trappings of wealth while the average Muslim is struggling.

Mind you, everyone from the prime minister to Rafizi Ramli has lamented that political operatives have become enamoured by the trappings of electoral success. Hadi is merely taking that to the logical extreme, conflated with religion.

Sure, he may define opponents as liberals or Western-inspired capitalist propagandists, but what the average struggling Muslim is hearing is that these political operatives are collaborating with the plutocrat class to keep them in subservience.

The fact that the cost of living has gone up and they cannot afford affordable housing, while the urban enclaves seem to be thriving, merely reinforces this Weltanschauung (worldview).

Of fake Muslims and successful nons

The most important part of Hadi’s Tabung Haji spiel is this: “There are too many government and semi-government business institutions suffering losses due to leaks under someone touted as the best finance minister, including among secular politicians who separate themselves from religion by abusing their political positions.

“The group most targeted for action is those with Malay and Islamic brands, from the largest to the smallest, to lower the image of Islam, as if there are none (wrongdoers) from among non-Muslims and non-Malays.

“In fact, economic activities are greater among non-Muslims and non-Malays, especially mega-sized ones that are contributors to corruption.”

Hadi made three points here. The first is that government institutions are corrupt because of fake Muslims and their secular supporters. The second is that Muslim businesses are often the target of the plutocrat class and their political minions.

And finally, the next between corruption, politics and commerce is defined by the economically successful non-Muslim polity.

Potent Urban Renewal Act

This is also why the Urban Renewal Act was such a potent weapon for Hadi. Not only could he play the race card, but more importantly, he could play the class card.

Look at how his no 2, Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man, defined the URA - “The minister responded that banks are available to provide loans... so the minister wants capitalists to monopolise the process. This is a subtle method to push out those who cannot afford it, particularly Malays and Indians.”

So with this issue, Hadi and co created a narrative that a rich non-Muslim minister is driving out poor muslims and Indians, while the capitalist banking structures profit.

Take the anti-Rohingya sentiment. Malay social media influencers, many of whom are supportive of PAS, continue to stoke the issue because these migrants are in direct competition with working-class Malays.

Who brought them here? Why are they allowed to set up businesses? For PAS, the answer is simple. It is the fault of the political elites and their collaborators who bring in these foreigners, who then economically displace the locals.

At one time, Umno was strong enough to flip the bird at PAS and maintain some sort of corporate religionism of its own, but these days, since the Malay polity is fractured and Umno without a strongman leader, Hadi remains the only game in town when it comes to the religious narrative of the state.

This is why Hadi can claim Perikatan Nasional is willing to forgo seats for Malay unity, when the reality is that there is no real difference when it comes to Islamic first principles that various Malay unity-type deals bring to the state or federal table.

PAS is willing to play the long game when it comes to political power if it means its political opponents or potential allies are weakened by various state elections.

All over the world, far-right forces use religion or culture wars to rile up the disenfranchised, blaming existing systems of governance but having no real desire to change those systems with genuine economic and social reforms.

What folks like Hadi want to do is use the disenfranchised to supplant the current ruling elites with religious cadres loyal only to the party.

The fact that PAS-controlled or influenced states are not socialist paradises of good governance is not the point. As Donald Trump, who won twice, demonstrated, these kinds of populist strategies work, and once you win, you can turn your country into a manure hole of corruption and incompetence.

Finance Twitter : “This decision was made after much deliberation as I embark on a new path to pursue further studies, a journey rooted in service and contribution and not necessarily bound by the world of politics,” – she said. Nurul said she would remain a PKR member and support the struggle for a better Malaysia championed by the party’s leadership under Anwar (her father).

However, in refusing to accept her resignation, PKR Central Leadership Council has instead granted her a leave of absence – indefinitely. PKR vice-president Saifuddin Nasution Ismail, who is Home Affairs Minister, will serve as acting deputy president. This means the party deputy president post is being “reserved or frozen” for an unknown period.

PKR communications director Fahmi Fadzil, who is also Malaysia’s Communication Minister cum Propaganda Minister, said – “We discussed Nurul Izzah’s request to step down as deputy president and, after hearing her views and those of the party leadership, the council agreed to grant her temporary leave of absence, which will begin after the national congress for an indefinite period,” 

Exactly why Nurul Izzah’s desire to step down as PKR’s No. 2 leader was rejected, and her resignation was re-packaged as “pursuing further studies” by the party leadership? The short answer – to save face. The long answer – to stop the perception that PKR is a sinking ship as even Anwar’s own daughter disagreed, clashed and abandoned the PM’s leadership and PKR’s direction.

If Izzah – “Puteri Reformasi” or Princess of Reform – is allowed to quit, it would be a slap in the face of the Premier himself. Mr Anwar can’t explain why his own daughter, groomed to take over the party, is quitting. It creates FUD – fear, uncertainty, and doubt. People leave jobs primarily to seek career growth, better pay, or a healthier work environment. You don’t suddenly leave your deputy CEO job.

Yes, nobody believes Nurul Izzah suddenly wanted to further her studies after she was elected around 14 months ago in PKR’s internal election, beating incumbent Rafizi Ramli after an intense campaign. Only Anwar’s cult supporters believe such unbelievable fairy tales. She would not have fought tooth and nail with Rafizi for the deputy president post, only to step down now to further studies.

Rafizi, Malaysia’s former economy minister, later left PKR and took over leadership of Bersama party in May. Why would she make an enemy out of her good reformist comrade by toppling him if she had no interest in the first place to lead the party as the deputy president? Worse, after strategist Rafizi left, she also wanted to leave now after creating all the mess that has weakened the party.

At best, Nurul Izzah has decided to give up his new toy after discovering that PKR deputy president isn’t a cushy job, and she was not up to the mark. At worst, she is giving up after losing hope with both her daddy and the party. Either way, it does not bode well for a ruling party that has bragged about Anwar’s popularity, but suffered several crushing defeats in state elections.  

The fact that Anwar is reduced to trusting someone like the clueless and incompetent Saifuddin Nasution as acting deputy president speaks volumes about the serious problems inside PKR. It seems the party is not only lacking talents, but Anwar’s half-baked plot to bulldoze dynastic politics and nepotism, contrasting with the party’s historical “Reformasi” roots against entrenched political patronage, has backfired.

When power-crazy Anwar plotted against his own deputy – Rafizi Ramli – last year, he arrogantly, stubbornly, and hypocritically ignored and rubbished critics and analysts’ argument that elevating her own daughter to positions like the deputy presidency would undermine PKR’s founding reformist ideals, which long criticized other Malaysian leaders for family favouritism.

The family-centric leadership model is one of the reasons that alienates grassroots supporters who expect merit-based advancement rather than hereditary succession, leading to a loss of confidence, distrust, and even hatred over Anwar’s treachery and betrayal after he got power. Even though Anwar, Nurul, and their supporters maintain that her victory was won through legitimate intra-party elections, the truth speaks otherwise.

To prevent Rafizi from winning, the cheating began when Parti Keadilan Rakyat under the instruction of Anwar abolished its “one member, one vote” system for national leadership elections and switched to a delegate-based system. This effectively transferred the responsibility of electing the party’s top six national office-bearers from 30,000 delegates to merely 222 divisions.

Four years ago, Mr. Rafizi won the party’s No 2 post when he defeated Anwar’s loyalist, Saifuddin Nasution. Despite Anwar’s open support for Saifuddin, Rafizi received roughly 68,992 votes compared to Saifuddin’s 50,038 votes. In the same 2022 party election, Selangor Chief Minister Amirudin Shari defeated Farhash Wafa Salvador Rizal Mubarak, who happened to be Anwar’s political secretary and trusted crony.

To unseat Rafizi, by hook or by crook, Anwar had to play dirty, including changing the party election system. The PM knew the only way to topple his deputy was to control or “bribe” a small 222 divisions rather than 30,000 delegates. Under pressure, Nurul reluctantly agreed to be used by her daddy to contest against Rafizi in May 2025. That has tainted her integrity and reputation.

Therefore, furthering studies is just a lazy and lame excuse. After Nurul defeated Rafizi and was crowned as the new deputy president, she led PKR to a disastrous defeat in the Sabah state election. Annihilated with just 1 seat, she practically went silent – and missing – since then. She did not care about the Johor state election, and did not bother to help in the Negeri Sembilan state election.

When someone like Nurul Izzah went MIA (missing in action) and kept a low profile, it’s not just a short burst of frustration or sulking. It’s a demonstration of dejection, depression, and disappointment. That sadness translates to hopelessness, and eventually gives up entirely. And she was right to give up after Sabah, as his daddy would lead Johor and Negeri Sembilan to two more crushing defeats.

Apparently, she had disagreed with certain directions the party was taking to the extent of facing “pressure from the party internally” to step aside. Internal source revealed that unlike Anwar Ibrahim, “Nurul Izzah is principled on some issues, and was not willing to shift on them.” Her differences in opinion from her father on the party’s direction continued to snowball till it exploded.

The final straw that broke the camel’s back was when narcissist PM Anwar cut direct constituency funding from specific PKR lawmakers such as PKR MPs Wong Chen (Subang),Lee Chean Chung (Petaling Jaya), and Rodziah Ismail (Ampang), who have vocally dissented or aligned themselves with internal party opposition. Anwar only welcomes apple polishers like Ramanan.

The affected MPs complained that their parliamentary service offices were completely denied access to the MyKHAS online portal, an official system used by lawmakers to manage and administer federal constituency allocations. Because Anwar dares not sack them, he cowardly bullies and intimidates them by denying his own PKR MPs their rightful constituency funding.

Anwar pushed back against accusations of starving constituencies. He even argued that federal development allocations are for the people and local communities, not an exclusive entitlement to be disbursed through the offices of elected Members of Parliament (MPs). Yet, he can’t explain why a similar discrimination does not apply to all 30 MPs from Barisan Nasional (BN), who have declared war on Anwar-led PH coalition.

The cowardice is written on the wall when the PM only has the balls to punish a few MPs from his own party. Facing a bigger force from governing partner BN, Anwar is as quiet as a church mouse. When BN chairman Zahid Hamidi challenged the PM to simply sack any minister he is unhappy with after Anwar tried to flex muscles by telling ministers to resign for attacking fellow unity government partners, the Premier responded by keeping silent.

That was not the only issue the “Puteri Reformasi” clashes with her “Fake Reformist” father. Her criticism of Azam Baki, the former Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Chief Commissioner caught with his pants down in shareholding and corporate mafia scandals has also added to the pressure for her to step aside.

Anwar, who extended Azam’s one-year contract thrice, has repeatedly, fiercely, and suspiciously defended the former anti-graft chief, saying he has shown “extraordinary courage” in going after powerful figures allegedly involved in corruption. Under pressure, a special committee to probe the allegations against Azam was formed by the Anwar administration, but has not made its findings public.

Nurul Izzah had called for the government to expand the scope of investigation on Azam and stressed the need for independent oversight of the anti-graft agency. She saw the actions of her father were inconsistent with the principles she and the party had long championed. But her public comments ultimately hurt Anwar and the party. Her inability to offer the strategy or charisma that Rafizi did makes Nurul practically useless.

Still, it raises a simple question – why did Anwar need to force Rafizi out by pushing his daughter up? Not only PKR is now without a strategist, but Izzah’s resignation further exposes the lack of leadership in PKR’s lineup. Anwar’s push to create a dynasty at a time when his daughter isn’t fit for the job has created “bad blood” with pro-Rafizi’s faction that openly attacks his leadership.

It doesn’t matter whether Nurul really goes for studies or not. She has proven to be an ineffective leader despite her short and unsuccessful stint as PKR deputy president. She should not have allowed herself to be used by daddy to topple Rafizi. It also doesn’t matter whether PKR president Anwar tries to cover up his daughter’s loss of trust in him. The damage is done. PKR is on the right track to a stunning loss in the next national election.

Other Articles That May Interest You …

• Congrats Again Anwar & Ah Loke – Factors For Losing N9
• Loke Thought Zahid Was Friend – Until Zahid Wanted To “Bungkus” Him
• Congrats Anwar & Loke – Continue Your Denial, Delusion, Arrogance To Lose More Elections
• No Good Options – Anwar To Lose Whether Election This Year Or 2027
• Azam’s RM14 Million Scandal – Damage Done, Too Little Too Late
• Bloomberg – How MACC Partners With Corporate Mafia To Seize Control Of Companies
• The Damage Is Done – Relocation Of 131-Year-Old Hindu Temple Fuels Accusations Of Bullying & Special Privileges
• From Zahid To Saifuddin – Corruption In Migrant Worker System
• Corruption Scandal – How Anti-Corruption Chief Azam Baki’s Half-Baked Story Backfires & Implicates Him Even More
• 12 Years’ Jail & RM210 Million Fine For World’s Biggest Crook Najib – A Result Of Insulting The Judge’s Intelligence
• RM90 Million Scandal – Here’s Why Hadi Warned Muslims To Trust Muslim Leaders, Even If They Are Evil & Wicked